*)G   21  1991 


es 

ZHIO 


*JG   21  1991 


es 


THE  LITERATURE  AND 

HISTORY  OF 
NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES 


The  Historical  Background  of 
Christianity 

The  Early  History  of 
Christianity 

By  John  Gresham  Machen 


PHILADELPHIA,  PA. 

THE  PRESBYTERIAN  BOARD  OF  PUBLICATION 

AND  SABBATH  SCHOOL  WORK 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Introduction 3 

Lesson 

1 .  The  New  Testament 5 

2.  The  Roman  Background  of  Christianity 10 

3.  The  Greek  Background  of  Christianity 15 

4.  The  Jewish  Background  of  Christianity:    I.  Palestinian  Judaism.  .  21 

5.  The  Jewish  Background  of  Christianity:    II.  The  Judaism  of  the 

Dispersion 26 

6.  The  Messiah 31 

7.  The  Book  of  The  Acts 36 

8.  The   Cross   and   the   Resurrection   the   Foundation   of   Apostolic 

Preaching 41 

9.  The  Beginnings  of  the  Christian  Church 46 

10.  The  First  Persecution 51 

1 1 .  The  First  Gentile  Converts 56 

12.  The  Conversion  of  Paul 60 

13.  The  Church  at  Antioch 67 

14.  The  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles 75 

15.  The  Council  at  Jerusalem 81 

16.  The  Gospel  Carried  Into  Europe 86 

17.  Encouragement  for  Recent  Converts 92 

18.  The  Conflict  with  the  Judaizers 97 

19.  Problems  of  a  Gentile  Church 103 

20.  The  Apostle  and  His  Ministry 109 

21.  The  Gospel  of  Salvation 115 

22.  Paul's  Journey  to  Rome 120 

23.  The  Supremacy  of  Christ 124 

24.  The  Church  of  Christ 129 

25.  Christ  and  His  Followers 133 

26.  Training  New  Leaders 138 

27.  A  Presentation  of  Jesus  to  Jewish  Christians 147 

28.  A  Graphic  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  Jesus 154 

29.  A  Greek  Historian's  Account  of  Jesus 158 

30.  The  Testimony  of  the  Beloved  Disciple 165 

31.  The  Jesus  of  the  Gospels 174 

32.  A  Document  of  the  Jerusalem  Church 178 

33.  Jesus  the  Fulfillment  of  the  Old  Testament 184 

34.  Christian  Fortitude 189 

35.  The  Christian's  Attitude  Toward  Error  and  Immorality 194 

36.  The  Life  of  the  Children  of  God 198 

37.  The  Messages  of  the  Living  Christ 203 

38.  A  Vision  of  the  Final  Triumph .  ^ 209 

39.  Review 213 

40.  The  Church  and  the  World 219 

41.  The  Christian  Message 225 

42.  The  Word  and  the  Sacraments 231 

43.  Prayer 238 

44.  The  Congregation 244 

45.  The  Relief  of  the  Needy 249 

46.  Organizing  for  Service 255 

47.  A  Mission  for  the  World 261 

48.  The  Christian  Ideal  of  Personal  Morality 266 

49.  Christianity  and  Human  Relationships 271 

50.  The  Christian  Use  of  the  Intellect 277 

51.  The  Christian  Hope  and  the  Present  Possession 282 

52.  Retrospect:   the  First  Christian  Century 287 

Copyright,  1915,  by  John  Gresham  Machen 


INTRODUCTION 


The  general  purpose  of  this  course  of  lessons  has  been  set  forth 
in  the  introduction  to  the  Student's  Text  Book.  There  is  a  tendency 
in  the  modern  Church  to  neglect  the  study  of  Bible  history.  Such 
neglect  will  inevitably  result  in  a  loss  of  power.  The  gospel  is  a 
record  of  something  that  has  happened,  and  uncertainty  about  the 
gospel  is  fatal  weakness.  Furthermore  the  historical  study  of  the 
apostolic  age — that  age  when  divine  revelation  established  the 
great  principles  of  the  Church's  life — is  the  best  corrective  for  a 
thousand  vagaries.  Much  can  be  learned  from  modern  pedagogy; 
but  after  all  what  is  absolutely  fundamental,  both  for  teacher  and 
for  student,    is  an  orderly  acquaintance  with   the  Bible  facts. 

The  Teacher's  Manual,  therefore,  is  intended  not  merely  to 
offer  suggestions  as  to  methods  of  teaching,  but  primarily  to  sup- 
plement the  teacher's  knowledge.  A  teacher  who  knows  only 
what  he  actually  imparts  to  the  class  is  inevitably  dull.  The  true 
teacher  brings  forth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and  old. 

The  sections  in  the  Teacher's  Manual,  since  they  are  intended 
to  be  supplementary,  should  not  be  read  until  after  careful  attention 
has  been  paid  to  the  corresponding  sections  in  the  Student's  Text 
Book.  Moreover,  both  sections  together  are  of  course  in  them- 
selves insufficient.  They  should  be  supplemented  by  other  read- 
ing. Suggestions  about  reading  have  been  put  at  the  end  of  every 
lesson.     Here,  however,  a  few  general  remarks  may  be  made. 

Davis'  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible"  and  Purves'  "Christianity  in 
the  Apostolic  Age,"  which  have  been  recommended  even  to  the 
student,  will  be  to  the  teacher  almost  invaluable.  The  earnest 
teacher  will  also  desire  to  refer  to  good  commentaries  on  The  Acts. 
The  commentaries  which  have  been  mentioned  in  connection  with 
the  individual  lessons  are  based  upon  the  English  Bible ;  but  every 
teacher  who  has  any  knowledge  of  Greek,  however  slight,  should 
use,  instead,  the  commentary  of  Knowling,  in  "The  Expositor's 
Greek  Testament."  For  the  life  of  Paul,  Lewin's  "Life  and 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul"  and  the  similar  book  of  Conybeare  and 
Howson  are  still  very  valuable  for  their  vivid  and  extended 
descriptions  of  the  scenes  of  the  missionary  journeys.     A  similar 


4  INTRODUCTION 

service  is  rendered,  in  more  up-to-date  form,  by  the  various  works 
of  Ramsay.  Stalker's  "Life  of  St.  Paul"  is  a  good  handbook. 
M'Clymont's  "New  Testament  and  Its  Writers"  contains  in- 
structive, though  very  brief,  introductions  to  all  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment books.  Hastings'  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible"  and  "Dictionary 
of  Christ  and  the  Gospels"  number  among  their  contributors 
many  writers  of  many  opinions.  They  are  rich  in  references  to 
the  vast  literature  of  modern  Biblical  discussion. 

The  writer  of  this  course  has  derived  information  from  many 
quarters.  Definite  acknowledgment  of  indebtedness,  since  no 
originality  is  claimed,  may  be  regarded  as  unnecessary.  It  is  a 
pleasure,  however,  to  render  special  thanks  to  Rev.  Professor  William 
Park  Armstrong,  D.  D.,  of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary,  whose 
wise  counsel  has  been  of  incalculable  assistance  at  many  points. 

The  actual  presentation  of  the  lessons  will,  of  course,  vary 
according  to  the  needs  of  the  classes  and  the  preferences  of  the 
teachers.  The  Student's  Text  Book  may  often  provide  a  con- 
venient order  of  presentation.  That  book  is  intended  not  merely 
to  be  read,  but  also  to  be  studied.  It  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  sort 
of  outline  of  the  course. 

The  "topics  for  study"  are  intended  to  serve  a  double  purpose. 
In  the  first  place,  they  will  test  the  student's  knowledge  of  the 
lesson  material ;  in  the  second  place,  they  will  afford  encouragement 
to  special  investigation.  Individual  topics  may  often  be  assigned 
for  thorough  treatment  to  individual  students,  while  the  class  as  a 
whole  may  use  all  the  topics  as  guides  to  a  general  knowledge. 

Personal  interest  in  the  individual  students  is  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance. Instruction  has  a  tenfold  value  when  it  is  backed  by 
friendship.  The  relation  of  the  students  to  the  Church  should 
be  a  matter  of  especial  concern.  If  any  member  of  the  class  has 
not  confessed  his  faith  in  Christ,  the  study  of  this  year  offers 
abundant  opportunity  for  a  word  in  season.  Our  study  reveals  the 
Church  as  a  divine  institution.     Shall  we  then  stand  aloof? 

In  this  course  the  teacher  has  the  opportunity  of  introducing 
young  people  of  maturing  minds  to  the  historical  study  of  the  New 
Testament.  There  could  be  no  more  inspiring  task.  Carried 
about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine,  the  Church  is  sadly  in  need  of 
an  assured  anchorage.  That  anchorage  should  be  sought  in 
history.  Ignorance  is  weak;  sound  knowledge,  sought  with  prayer, 
and  blessed  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  will  lead  to  a  more  stalwart  and 
more  intelligent  faith. 


LESSON  I 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 


This  is  an  introductory  lesson.  It  should  be  used,  first  of  all, 
to  answer  intelligent  general  questions  about  the  New  Testament. 
Some  of  these  questions  will  be  discussed  briefly  under  Sections 
1  to  3,  below. 

The  historical  study  of  the  New  Testament,  based  upon  a  study 
of  the  circumstances  under  which  the  individual  books  were  written, 
will  probably  be  new  to  many  of  the  students.  The  new  point  of 
view  should  be  used  to  awaken  interest.  The  climax  of  the  lesson 
should,  however,  be  a  presentation  of  the  unity  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  the  very  Word  of  God  to  us.  Historical  study  should  be 
made — and  can  be  made — subservient  to  reverent  and  thankful 
obedience. 

1.  THE  ORIGIN  AND  MEANING  OF  THE  NAME 

The  English  word  "testament"  comes  from  a  Latin  word.  The 
equivalent  Greek  word  is  hard  to  translate.  As  used  in  the  Greek 
Bible  it  may  mean  either  "covenant"  or  "testament."  Usually  it 
should  probably  be  translated  "covenant." 

The  phrase  "new  covenant"  occurs  about  five  times  in  the  New 
Testament.  In  none  of  these  passages  does  the  phrase  refer  to 
the  "New  Testament"  in  our  sense.  It  designates  a  new  relation- 
ship into  which  men  have  been  received  with  God.  The  old 
covenant  was  made,  through  the  mediatorship  of  Moses,  with  the 
Hebrew  nation;  the  new  covenant,  hinted  at  in  prophecy,  Jer. 
31  :  31,  and  instituted  by  the  Lord  Jesus,  I  Cor.  11  :  25,  was  made 
with  all  those,  of  every  tribe  and  tongue  and  people  and  nation, 
who  should  through  faith  accept  the  salvation  offered  by  Christ. 
Those  who  believe  become,  like  Israel  of  old,  God's  chosen  people, 
and  enter  into  the  warmth  and  joy  of  the  divine  communion.  The 
names  "old  and  new  covenants,"  then,  were  applied  first  to  these 
two  special  relationships  into  which  God  entered  with  men.  After- 
wards the  names  were  applied  to  the  books  in  which  the  conditions 
of  those  relationships  were  set  forth.     Perhaps  it  would  have  been 


6  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

better  if  we  had  started  to  say  "New  Covenant"  where  we  now  say 
"New  Testament."  At  any  rate  the  idea  alluded  to  in  the 
name  is  the  inspiring  idea,  realized  in  Christ,  of  an  alliance 
with  God.  The  New  Testament  is  the  divine  treaty  by  the 
terms  of  which  God  has  received  us  rebels  and  enemies  into  peace 
with  himself. 

2.  ONE  BOOK,  OR  A  COLLECTION  OF  BOOKS? 

In  the  first  place,  the  New  Testament  may  be  treated  in  every 
respect  as  a  single  book.  That  course  is  adopted  by  many  of  the 
most  devoted  lovers  of  the  Bible.  By  them  the  Bible  is  treated 
simply  as  a  textbook  of  religion.  Passages  are  quoted  indiscrimi- 
nately from  all  parts  of  it,  without  much  regard  to  the  context. 
The  wide  differences  of  form  and  of  spirit  among  the  various  books 
are  ignored.  The  historical  implications  of  the  books  are  of  course 
accepted  as  true,  but  practically  they  are  left  quite  unassimilated. 

Now  let  us  be  quite  plain  about  one  thing.  The  men  who  use 
the  Bible  in  this  way  are  right  in  the  main  point.  They  treat  the 
Bible  as  the  guide  of  life  for  time  and  for  eternity.  And  if  by  the 
use  of  the  Bible  we  can  come  into  communion  with  God,  we  can 
afford  to  miss  a  good  many  other  things.  Nevertheless,  the  Bible 
is  as  a  matter  of  fact  not  a  mere  textbook  of  religion,  and  if  we 
treat  it  as  such  we  miss  much  of  its  richness.  If  the  Bible  were 
merely  a  systematic  treatise,  it  would  be  far  easier  to  interpret.  The 
interpreter  would  be  spared  a  great  deal  of  trouble,  but  the  burden 
would  be  heaped  upon  the  preacher.  As  it  is,  the  Bible  is  itself  a 
preacher,  because  it  is  in  such  close  contact  with  the  actual  expe- 
rience of  men  of  flesh  and  blood.  Its  general  teachings  are  given  us 
in  large  measure  only  through  the  medium  of  history,  through  the 
medium  of  example.  In  order  to  arrive  at  the  general  truths,  there- 
fore, intellectual  labor  is  often  necessary.  God  has  made  things 
harder  for  the  intellect  that  he  may  strike  home  the  more  surely  to 
the  heart.  If  Paul  had  written  a  systematic  theology,  the  New 
Testament  way  of  salvation  might  in  some  ways  have  been  plainer 
than  it  is.  It  would  have  been  plain  to  the  intellect,  but  it  would 
have  needed  interpretation  to  the  heart.  Conviction  can  be 
wrought  only  by  the  immediate  impact  of  personal  life.  The 
theology  of  Paul,  of  itself,  might  be  a  dead  thing;  the  religious 
experience  of  Paul,  interwoven  with  his  theology,  and  bared  be- 
fore us  in  the  epistles,  is  irresistible. 

In  the  second  place,  the  historical  form  of  the  Bible  may  be 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  7 

considered  at  the  expense  of  its  spiritual  content.  The  Bible  may 
be  treated  simply  as  a  storybook.  Such  a  method  of  treatment 
is  exceedingly  common  to-day.  "The  Bible  as  literature"  is  its 
slogan.  This  treatment  has  simply  missed  the  main  point  alto- 
gether. It  is  incomparably  inferior  to  that  treatment  which  takes 
the  Bible  as  a  mere  textbook  of  religion.  The  Bible  as  an  addition 
to  the  world's  history  or  the  world's  literature  has,  indeed,  con- 
siderable educational  value.     But  it  does  not  give  eternal  life. 

A  third  method  is  possible,  and  that  third  method  is  right. 
The  historical  and  literary  form  of  the  Bible  is  recognized  to  the 
full.  But  it  is  regarded  not  as  an  end  in  itself,  but  as  a  means 
to  an  end.  Historical  study  is  necessary  not  only  to  establish 
to  the  modern  man  the  saving  facts  of  the  gospel,  but  also  to  do 
justice  to  the  dramatic  narrative  form  in  which  God  has  revealed 
to  us  his  eternal  will. 

It  is  nearer  the  truth,  then,  to  say  that  the  New  Testament  is  a 
single  book  than  to  say  that  it  is  a  collection  of  books.  Its  parts 
differ  widely  among  themselves,  in  authorship,  in  date,  in  circum- 
stances, in  aim.  Those  differences  must  be  studied  carefully,  if 
the  full  meaning  is  to  be  obtained.  But  widely  as  the  New  Testa- 
ment writings  differ  among  themselves,  they  differ  yet  far  more 
widely  from  all  other  books.  They  presented  themselves  originally 
to  the  Church  with  a  divine  authority,  which  is  foreign  to  the 
ordinary  writings  of  men.  That  authority  has  been  confirmed 
through  the  Christian  centuries.  Those  who  have  submitted  their 
lives  to  the  New  Testament  have  never  been  confounded.  The 
New  Testament  has  been  to  them  the  voice  of  God. 

3.  THE  FOUR  DIVISIONS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

(1)  The  Gospels. — Christianity  is  based  upon  historical  facts. 
Attempts,  it  is  true,  are  often  made  to  separate  it  from  history. 
But  they  are  bound  to  result  in  failure.  Give  up  history,  and  you 
can  retain  some  things.  But  you  can  never  retain  a  gospel.  For 
"gospel"  means  "good  news,"  and  "good  news"  means  tidings, 
information  derived  from  the  witness  of  others.  In  other  words,  it 
means  history.  The  question  whether  religion  can  be  indepen- 
dent of  history  is  really  just  the  old  question  whether  we  need  a 
gospel.  The  gospel  is  news  that  something  has  happened — some- 
thing that  puts  a  different  face  upon  life.  What  that  something  is 
is  told  us  in  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John.  It  is  the  life  and 
death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ. 


8  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(2)  The  Book  of  The  Acts.— The  Book  of  The  Acts  is  a  history 
of  the  extension  of  Christianity  from  Jerusalem  out  into  the  Gentile 
world.  It  represents  that  extension  as  guided  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  and  thus  exhibits  the  divine  warrant  for  the  acceptance  of 
us  Gentiles,  and  for  the  development  of  the  Christian  Church. 
It  provides  the  outline  of  apostolic  history  without  which  we  could 
not  understand  the  other  New  Testament  books,  especially  the 
epistles  of  Paul.  It  illustrates  to  the  full  what  has  been  said  above 
about  the  value  of  the  historical  form  in  which  the  Bible  teaching 
is  presented.  By  reading  this  vivid  narrative  we  obtain  an  impres- 
sion of  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  no  systematic  treatise 
could  give. 

(3)  The  Epistles. — The  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament  are 
not  just  literature  put  in  an  epistolary  form,  but  real  letters.  It  is 
true  that  the  addresses  of  some  of  them  are  very  broad,  for 
example,  those  of  James  and  of  I  Peter;  and  that  some  of  them 
contain  no  specific  address  at  all,  for  example,  Hebrews  and  I  John. 
But  the  great  majority  of  them,  at  least,  were  written  under  very 
special  circumstances  and  intended  to  be  read  first  by  very 
definite  people. 

The  chief  letter-writer  of  the  New  Testament  was  the  apostle 
Paul.  To  a  certain  extent  he  used  the  forms  of  letter-writing  of 
his  time,  just  as  everyone  to-day  begins  a  letter  with  ''Dear  Sir." 
Within  the  last  twenty  years  a  great  number  of  Greek  private 
letters,  dating  from  about  the  time  of  Paul,  have  been  discovered 
in  Egypt,  where  they  have  been  preserved  by  the  dry  climate. 
It  is  interesting  to  compare  them  with  the  letters  of  Paul.  There 
are  some  striking  similarities  in  language;  for  both  these  letter- 
writers  and  Paul  used  the  natural  language  of  daily  life  rather 
than  the  extremely  artificial  language  of  the  literature  of  that 
period.  To  a  certain  extent,  also,  Paul  used  the  same  epistolary 
forms.  The  differences,  however,  are  even  more  instructive  than 
the  resemblances.  It  is  true,  the  Pauline  epistles  are  not  literary 
treatises,  but  real  letters.  But  on  the  other  hand  they  are  not 
ordinary  private  letters  intended  to  be  read  and  thrown  away,  like 
the  letters  that  have  been  discovered  in  Egypt.  Most  of  them 
were  intended  to  be  read  originally  in  churches.  It  is  natural,  then, 
that  they  should  have  been  written  in  a  loftier  style  than  is  to  be 
found  in  mere  business  communications  and  the  like.  And  if  Paul 
uses  the  epistolary  forms  of  his  time  he  uses  them  in  an  entirely 
new  way.     Even  the  mere  openings  of  the  epistles  are  made  the 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  9 

vehicle  of  Christian  truth.  "Grace  to  you  and  peace  from  God 
our  Father  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ" — there  is  nothing  like  that 
in  contemporary  letter-writing.  The  openings  of  the  Pauline 
epistles  form  an  interesting  study.  They  are  varied  with  wonderful 
skill  to  suit  the  varied  character  and  subject  matter  of  the  letters 
that  follow.     Paul  is  never  merely  formal. 

The  letters  of  Paul  differ  widely  among  themselves.  The  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  is  almost  a  systematic  exposition  of  the  plan  of 
salvation.  Philemon  is  concerned  with  a  little  personal  matter 
between  Paul  and  one  of  his  converts.  But  even  where  Paul  is 
most  theological  he  is  personal,  and  even  where  he  is  most  personal, 
he  is  faithful  to  his  theology.  Theology  in  him  is  never  separate 
from  experience,  and  experience  never  separate  from  theology. 
Even  petty  problems  he  settles  always  in  the  light  of  eternal  prin- 
ciples. Hence  his  letters,  though  the  specific  circumstances  that 
gave  rise  to  them  are  past  and  gone,  will  never  be  antiquated. 

(4)  The  Apocalypse. — The  Christian  life  is  a  life  of  hope. 
Inwardly  we  are  free,  but  our  freedom  is  not  yet  fully  realized. 
We  are  in  danger  of  losing  our  hope  in  the  trials  or  in  the  mere 
humdrum  of  life.  To  keep  it  alive,  the  Apocalypse  opens  a  glorious 
vision  of  the  future.  The  vision  is  presented  in  symbolical 
language.  It  is  not  intended  to  help  in  any  calculation  of  the 
times  and  seasons.  But  it  shows  us  the  Lamb  upon  the  throne — 
and  that  is  enough. 


In  the  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on 
"Bible,  "Canon  of  the  New  Testament,"  "Covenant,"  "New  Testa- 
ment," and  "Testament." 


LESSON  II 

THE  ROMAN  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY 


Christianity  is  not  a  human  product.  It  is  not  to  be  explained 
by  what  preceded  it  on  the  earth.  It  is  a  new  beginning  in  history, 
an  immediate  exercise  of  the  divine  power. 

But  though  Christianity  was  not  produced  by  men,  it  operates 
upon  men,  and  upon  men  subject  to  all  the  ordinary  conditions  of 
earthly  life.  Primitive  Christianity,  then,  which  we  shall  study 
this  year,  cannot  be  understood  fully  without  an  examination 
of  the  historical  conditions  under  which  it  arose. 

In  the  class,  the  lesson  should  probably  be  approached  through 
the  New  Testament  examples  of  the  general  principles  which  are 
outlined  in  the  lesson  helps.  Examples  will  be  found  in  the  passages 
assigned  in  the  Student's  Text  Book,  and  others  should  be  sought 
for  elsewhere. 

1.     THE  ESTABLISHMENT  OF  THE  EMPIRE 

By  the  middle  of  the  first  century  before  Christ  the  power  of  the 
Roman  republic  extended  around  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  Victories 
abroad,  however,  were  accompanied  by  serious  troubles  at  home. 
The  increase  of  wealth  and  the  importation  of  slave  labor  had 
produced  unfortunate  social  conditions.  The  realm  had  become 
too  large  to  be  administered  adequately  by  the  old  republican 
government.  Individuals  sometimes  obtained  practical  control 
of  affairs,  and  the  state  was  torn  by  civil  wars.  Finally,  in  49  B.  C, 
Julius  Caesar  entered  Rome  at  the  head  of  an  army,  and  Roman 
liberty  was  at  an  end.  After  the  assassination  of  Caesar  in  44  B.  C, 
there  was  a  succession  of  civil  wars,  and  then,  by  the  victory  of 
Actium  in  31  B.  C,  Octavius,  who  later  assumed  the  name  of 
Augustus,  became  sole  ruler.     Augustus  died  in  A.  D.  14. 

Subsequent  emperors  during  the  first  century  were:  Tiberius 
(A.  D.  14-37),  Caligula  (A.  D.  37-41),  Claudius  (A.  D.  41-54), 
Nero  (A.  D.  54-68),  Galba,  Otho  and  Vitellius  (A.  D.  69),  Vespasian 
(A.  D.  69-79),  Titus  (A.  D.  79-81),  Domitian  (A.  D.  81-96),  Nerva 
(A.  D.  96-98),  Trajan  (A.  D.  98-117). 

10 


THE  ROMAN  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY       II 

2.     ROMAN  ADMINISTRATION  UNDER  THE  EMPIRE 

The  general  advantages  of  the  Roman  imperial  government  have 
been  considered  in  the  Student's  Text  Book.  It  will  here  be  ad- 
visable to  consider  one  or  two  features  a  little  more  in  detail.  Much 
of  what  follows  can  be  illustrated  from  the  New  Testament;  for 
the  acquaintance  of  New  Testament  writers,  especially  of  Luke, 
with  Roman  administration  is  not  only  accurate  but  also  minute. 
The  students  should  be  encouraged  to  seek  New  Testament  illustra- 
tions for  themselves. 

(1)  The  Provinces. — The  provinces  of  the  empire  are  to  be 
distinguished  from  the  territories  of  subject  kings  or  princes. 
The  latter  were  quite  subservient  to  Rome,  but  were  given  more 
independence  of  administration.  A  good  example  of  such  a  subject 
king,  theoretically  an  ally,  but  in  reality  a  vassal,  was  Herod  the 
Great,  who  ruled  over  all  Palestine  till  4  B.  C. 

The  provinces  themselves  were  divided  into  two  great  classes — 
imperial  provinces  and  senatorial  provinces. 

The  imperial  provinces  were  under  the  immediate  control  of  the 
emperor.  They  were  governed  by  "legates,"  who  had  no  regular 
term  of  office,  but  served  at  the  emperor's  pleasure.  The  imperial 
provinces  were  those  in  which,  on  account  of  unsettled  conditions, 
or  for  the  defense  of  the  empire,  large  bodies  of  troops  had  to  be 
maintained.  Thus,  by  keeping  the  appointment  of  the  legates 
exclusively  in  his  own  hands,  the  emperor  retained  the  direct 
control  of  the  all-important  power  of  the  army.  A  good  example 
of  an  imperial  province  is  the  great  province  of  Syria,  with  capital 
at  Antioch.  Palestine  was  more  or  less  under  the  supervision  of 
the  Syrian  legate. 

Districts  different  from  the  great  imperial  provinces,  but,  like 
them,  under  the  immediate  control  of  the  emperor,  were  governed 
by  "procurators."  Judea,  from  A.  D.  6  to  A.  D.  41,  and  from 
A.  D.  44  on,  is  an  example. 

The  senatorial  provinces  were  governed  by  "proconsuls,"  chosen 
by  lot  from  among  the  members  of  the  Senate.  The  proconsuls 
served  for  only  one  year.  Even  over  these  provinces  and  their 
governors  the  emperor  retained  the  fullest  supervisory  authority. 
The  senatorial  provinces  composed  the  central  and  more  settled 
portions  of  the  empire,  where  large  standing  armies  would  not  be 
needed.  Examples  are  Achaia,  with  capital  at  Corinth,  and  Cyprus 
with  capital  at  Paphos.  Proconsuls  of  both  of  these  provinces  are 
mentioned  in  the  New  Testament  by  name. 


12  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(2)  Local  Government. — The  Romans  did  not  attempt  to  in- 
troduce perfect  uniformity  throughout  the  empire.  The  original 
Greek  unit  of  political  life  was  the  city,  and  Greek  cities  were 
scattered  over  the  east  before  the  Roman  conquest.  With  regard 
to  local  affairs,  many  of  the  cities  retained  a  certain  amount  of  in- 
dependence. It  is  interesting  to  observe  the  local  peculiarities  of 
the  cities  described  in  The  Acts. 

In  addition  to  the  Greek  cities,  many  of  which  were  more  or  less 
"free"  in  local  affairs,  many  "Roman  colonies"  had  been  established 
here  and  there  throughout  the  empire.  The  original  colonists 
were  often  veterans  of  the  Roman  armies.  Of  course  the  populations 
soon  came  to  be  mixed,  but  Roman  traditions  were  cultivated  in 
the  colonies  more  than  elsewhere.  A  number  of  the  cities  of  The 
Acts  were  colonies,  and  one,  Philippi,  is  expressly  declared  to  be 
such.  Acts  16  :  12.  In  that  city  the  Roman  character  of  the 
magistrates  appears  clearly  from  the  Lucan  narrative.  There  were 
"praetors"  and  "lictors." 

(3)  Roman  Citizenship. — Before  New  Testament  times  Roman 
citizenship  had  been  extended  to  all  Italy.  Italy,  therefore,  was 
not  a  province  or  group  of  provinces,  but  was  regarded  as  a  part  of 
Rome.  Outside  of  Italy  Roman  citizenship  was  a  valuable  special 
privilege.  It  raised  a  man  above  the  mass  of  the  provincial  popula- 
tion. Some  of  the  advantages  of  it  appear  clearly  in  the  New 
Testament  narrative.  Because  Paul  was  a  Roman  citizen  he  was 
legally  exempt  from  the  most  degrading  forms  of  punishment,  and 
had  a  right  to  appeal  to  the  court  of  the  emperor.  Roman  citizen- 
ship was  sometimes  acquired  by  money,  but  Paul  inherited  it  from 
his  father. 

3.     ROMAN  RELIGION 

Under  the  empire,  Rome  was  possessed  of  a  state  religion.  The 
ancient  gods  of  the  republic  were  retained.  There  were  great 
divinities  like  Jupiter  and  Mars,  and  there  were  numberless  private 
divinities  of  individual  households.  The  ancient  religion  had, 
indeed,  undergone  modifications.  New  divinities  in  plenty  had 
been  received.  But  the  reception  of  the  new  did  not  involve  aboli- 
tion of  the  old.  On  the  contrary,  the  gods  of  other  peoples  could 
be  accepted  just  because  they  were  regarded  as  nothing  but  the 
Roman  gods  under  different  names.  Thus,  long  before  the  Christian 
era,  there  had  been  a  thoroughgoing  identification  of  the  gods  of 
Greece  with  the  gods  of  Rome.     The  Greek  Zeus,  for  example,  was 


THE  ROMAN  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY       1 3 

identified  with  the  Roman  Jupiter;  the  Greek  Ares  with  the  Roman 
Mars.  The  gods  of  countries  other  than  Greece  were  also  received, 
though,  as  far  as  the  city  of  Rome  was  concerned,  with  some  con- 
servatism. 

In  the  Roman  world,  religion  was  a  national  affair.  Worship 
of  the  national  gods  was  not  only  piety,  but  also  patriotism.  Pa- 
triotism and  religion  were  inseparably  connected.  Support  of  the 
gods  of  Rome,  even  where  personal  faith  in  them  had  been  under- 
mined, was  considered  to  be  the  duty  of  every  loyal  citizen. 

The  political  aspect  of  Roman  religion  appears  most  clearly  in 
the  worship  of  the  Roman  emperors.  This  remarkable  develop- 
ment appears  from  the  beginning  of  the  empire.  Augustus,  indeed, 
refused  to  receive  divine  honors,  at  least  in  the  west.  But  in  the 
east  even  he  was  worshiped,  and  as  time  went  on  the  reluctance 
of  the  emperors  disappeared.  Some  of  the  worst  of  the  emperors 
were  most  insistent  upon  their  own  divinity. 

Perhaps  the  first  impulse  of  the  modern  man  is  to  regard  the 
Caesar  cult  simply  as  a  particularly  despicable  form  of  flattery. 
In  reality  it  was  more  than  that.  It  was  not  established  by 
imperial  edict.  It  was  not  dictated  primarily  by  servile  fear. 
The  Greek  inhabitants  of  the  empire  really  regarded  Augustus  as 
their  saviour.  And  so  he  was,  as  far  as  any  man  could  be.  He 
saved  them  from  the  miseries  of  civil  war,  and  from  the  rapacity 
of  the  degenerate  republic;  he  gave  them  peace  and  happiness. 
And  they  responded  by  regarding  him  as  a  god. 

To  them  it  was  natural.  To  them  it  was  nothing  new.  Alex- 
ander the  Great  had  been  regarded  as  a  god  long  before  the 
Christian  era.  His  successors  in  Syria  and  in  Egypt  had  also 
received  divine  honors.  To  the  genuine  Romans,  the  thing  did  not 
come  so  easy.  The  Caesar  cult,  at  least  at  first,  was  not  developed 
in  the  west.  But  even  the  Romans  could  worship  the  emperor's 
"genius"  or  spirit,  and  from  that  to  the  actual  worship  of  the 
emperor  was  but  a  step.  Essential  to  the  whole  process  of  deifica- 
tion, both  in  Rome  and  in  the  east,  was  the  close  connnection  in 
ancient  thinking  between  deity  and  humanity,  and  between  re- 
ligion and  the  state.  If  patriotism  is  religion,  then  the  king  is  a 
god. 

The  Caesar  cult  was  the  most  palpable  incorporation  of  the  state 
religion.  Worship  of  the  emperor,  therefore,  might  well  be  the 
test  of  loyalty  to  Rome.  It  could  be  practiced  by  skeptics  and 
philosophers.     It  could  be  practiced  by  the  devotees  of  all  religions — 


14  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

save  two.  Jews  and  Christians  alone  could  not  bow  at  the  emperor's 
shrine,  for  their  God  was  a  God  who  could  brook  no  rival.  He 
was  not  merely  the  greatest  among  many.  He  was  the  only  Lord, 
Maker  of  heaven  and  earth. 

4.     THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE  AND  SUBSEQUENT  HISTORY 

Between  Christianity  and  the  Roman  state,  with  its  official 
religion,  a  life-and-death  struggle  was  inevitable.  But  in  the 
providence  of  God  it  was  delayed.  The  empire  was  used  not  to 
crush  Christianity  but  to  open  the  world  before  it. 

But  was  the  empire  really  identical  with  the  world?  It  seemed 
so  to  the  Romans  and  to  the  Greeks.  To  them  the  empire  was  the 
world.  And  they  were  right.  Not,  of  course,  in  a  literal  sense. 
In  the  first  century  after  Christ,  vast  civilizations — for  example 
the  civilization  of  China — were  already  in  existence.  There  were 
great  peoples  of  whom  the  Romans  had  never  heard.  But  Roman 
arrogance  has  at  last  been  vindicated.  For  Rome  was  in  reality 
the  key  to  subsequent  history.  Rome  was  the  parent  of  Europe, 
and  Europe  is  moving  the  world.  Even  China  is  at  last  being 
opened  to  the  civilization  of  Rome.  The  Romans  were  right. 
He  who  could  master  Rome  would  be  master,  one  day,  of  the  world. 

It  has  been  a  long  process.  But  God's  plans  are  sure.  Christian- 
ity appeared  at  the  one  time  when  the  world  was  open  before  it. 
By  the  power  of  the  divine  Spirit  it  conquered  the  empire.  The 
empire  dominated  its  barbarian  conquerors.  The  barbarians  are 
the  parents  of  modern  civilization.  Modern  civilization  is  invading 
the  earth's  remotest  bounds.  China,  at  last,  is  within  our  ken. 
Realms  long  closed  have  at  last  been  opened.  Another  great 
opportunity!  An  opportunity  for  greed  and  selfishness!  An 
opportunity  for  a  dismal  skepticism!  And  an  opportunity  for  the 
Church  of  God! 


In  the  Library. — Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Adeney, 
article  on  "Caesar";  Gwatkin,  articles  on  "Roman  Empire,"  and 
"Rome."  Hastings,  "Encyclopaedia  of  Religion  and  Ethics":  Iverach, 
article  on  "Csesarism."  Westcott,  "The  Two  Empires,"  in  "The 
Epistles  of  St.  John,"  pp.  250-282.  Ramsay,  "The  Cities  of  St.  Paul," 
pp.  48-81. 


LESSON  III 

THE  GREEK  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY 


The  purpose  of  the  present  lesson  is  to  make  the  student  feel 
that  the  gospel  was  from  the  beginning  a  real  gospel  in  a  real  world. 
If  we  isolate  the  early  preaching  from  its  environment,  we  make  it 
seem  like  an  unreal  thing.  Study  of  New  Testament  times  makes 
the  New  Testament  itself  become  a  more  living,  a  more  interesting 
book. 

In  the  Student's  Text  Book  an  outline  of  the  Hellenistic  age  has 
been  provided.  It  has  been  supplemented  below  by  illustrative 
material.  But  in  the  class  the  lesson  can  probably  be  best 
approached  from  the  side  of  the  New  Testament  itself.  In  what 
languages  is  the  Bible  written?  How  did  the  New  Testament  come 
to  be  written  in  Greek?  What  other  languages  are  mentioned  in 
the  New  Testament?  What  light  do  these  passages  shed  upon  the 
linguistic  conditions  of  the  time?  What  is  the  attitude  of  the  apos- 
tles toward  Greek  thought?  Is  that  attitude  altogether  unfavorable, 
or  did  the  early  missionaries  ever  lay  hold  upon  the  higher  aspira- 
tions of  their  Gentile  hearers  (Athens)  ?  Where  did  the  missionaries 
come  into  contact  with  heathen  superstition  ?  (Several  fine  examples 
in  The  Acts).  What  was  the  moral  condition  of  the  Greco-Roman 
world?  How  was  the  Hellenistic  age  like  our  own?  Why  did  God 
send  our  Lord  just  in  the  first  century?  What  was  the  social  con- 
dition of  the  early  Christians?  Do  you  think  that  was  an  advantage 
or  a  disadvantage?  What  men  of  higher  position  are  mentioned 
in  the  New  Testament?  Questions  like  these  will  serve  to  relate 
the  general  expositions  in  the  lesson  helps  to  the  New  Testament 
itself.  The  lesson  helps  are  intended  to  provide  merely  the  pre- 
suppositions necessary  for  intelligent  study.  God  working  for 
real  men  in  a  real  world — that  is  the  subject  of  the  lesson. 

1.     THE  HELLENISTIC  AGE 

The  Greek  world  culture  which  prevailed  after  the  conquest  of 
Alexander  was  widely  different  from  the  Greek  life  of  the  classical 
period.  The  earlier  period  is  called  the  "Hellenic"  period,  the  later 
period  is  designated  as  "Hellenistic."     When  Greek  thought  made 

15 


l6  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

itself  master  of  the  world,  it  became  mingled  with  numberless 
foreign  elements.  The  mixture  appears  most  clearly,  perhaps, 
in  the  sphere  of  religion.  Polytheism  was  capable  of  indefinite 
expansion.  New  gods  could  easily  be  identified  with  the  old,  or 
else  be  received  along  with  them  without  a  conflict.  The  religion 
of  the  Greco-Roman  world  is  therefore  different  from  that  of 
ancient  Greece.  It  is  a  curious  mixture  of  the  most  diverse  beliefs. 
Nevertheless,  the  whole  deserves  to  be  called  Hellenistic,  because 
even  the  most  strikingly  non-Grecian  elements  were  usually  sub- 
jected more  or  less  to  the  subtle  molding  of  the  Greek  spirit. 

The  Hellenistic  age  used  to  be  despised,  but  among  modern 
scholars  it  is  coming  into  its  own.  Its  literary  products  are  ad- 
mittedly inferior  to  the  glories  of  the  earlier  age,  but  even  in  literature 
its  achievements  are  not  to  be  despised,  and  in  other  spheres  it  is 
supreme.  Notably  in  mathematics  and  in  natural  science  it  was 
the  golden  age.  Euclid,  the  geometrician,  lived  three  centuries 
before  Christ. 

The  learning  of  the  Hellenistic  age  was  centered  in  Alexandria  in 
Egypt,  a  city  which  had  been  founded  by  Alexander  the  Great. 
Athens  had,  perhaps,  ceased  to  possess  the  primacy.  That  fact 
is  typical  of  the  time.  Greek  culture  had  ceased  to  belong  to 
Greece  in  the  narrower  sense.  It  had  become  a  possession  of  the 
world.  The  great  library  of  Alexandria  was  a  sign  of  the  times. 
The  Hellenistic  age  was  an  age  of  widespread  learning. 

When  Rome  became  master  of  the  eastern  world,  conditions  were 
not  fundamentally  changed.  Rome  merely  hastened  a  process  that 
was  already  at  work.  Already  the  nations  had  been  brought 
together  by  the  spread  of  Greek  culture;  Roman  law  merely  added 
the  additional  bond  of  political  unity.  The  Roman  legions  were 
missionaries  of  an  all-pervading  Hellenism. 

The  Greco-Roman  world  was  astonishingly  modern.  It  was 
modern  in  its  cosmopolitanism.  In  our  own  time  the  nations 
have  again  been  brought  together.  The  external  agencies  for 
their  welding  are  far  more  perfect  to-day  than  they  were  under  the 
empire.  Even  the  Roman  roads  would  be  but  a  poor  substitute 
for  the  railroad  and  the  telegraph  and  the  steamship.  But  on  the 
other  hand  we  lack  the  bond  of  a  common  language.  In  some 
ways  the  civilized  world  was  even  more  of  a  unit  in  the  first  century 
than  it  is  to-day. 

The  cosmopolitanism  of  the  Roman  Empire  was  a  God-given 
opportunity  for  the  Church.     In  a  cosmopolitan  age,  if  a  man  has 


THE  GREEK  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY       1 7 

something  to  say,  he  will  not  lack  for  an  audience.  His  message 
will  be  understood  in  one  place  as  well  as  in  another.  The  lesson 
is  obvious  for  the  Church  of  to-day.  Again  God  has  opened  the 
world  before  us.  If  we  have  a  message,  in  God's  name  let  us  pro- 
claim it  while  yet  there  is  time. 

i  2.     THE  GREEK  BIBLE 

The  Church  originated  in  Palestine.  The  first  missionaries  were 
native  Jews.  Yet  even  they  had  been  affected  by  the  cosmopolitan- 
ism of  the  time.  Even  they  could  use  Greek,  in  addition  to  their 
native  language.  And  Paul,  the  greatest  of  the  missionaries, 
though  a  Jew,  was  a  citizen  of  a  Greek  city.  The  Church  from  the 
beginning  was  able  to  speak  to  the  larger  world. 

One  difficulty  might  possibly  have  arisen.  The  Christian  mission 
was  not  carried  on  merely  by  the  oral  word.  From  the  beginning 
Christianity  was  a  religion  with  a  Book.  And  that  Book  was  not 
Greek.  On  the  contrary  it  was  intensely  un-Grecian.  The  Old 
Testament  is  intolerant  of  heathen  ideas.  It  is  deeply  rooted  in 
the  life  of  the  chosen  people.  How  could  a  Hebrew  book  be  used 
in  the  Greek  world? 

The  difficulty  might  have  been  serious.  But  in  the  providence  of 
God  it  had  been  overcome.  The  Old  Testament  was  a  Hebrew 
book,  but  before  the  Christian  era  it  had  been  translated  into  Greek. 
From  the  beginning  Christianity  was  provided  with  a  Greek  Bible. 
It  is  always  difficult  to  make  a  new  translation  of  the  Bible.  Every 
missionary  knows  that.  The  introduction  of  a  new  translation 
takes  time.  It  was  fortunate,  then,  that  a  Greek-speaking  Church 
had  a  Greek  Bible  ready  to  hand. 

Everything  was  prepared  for  the  gospel.  God's  time  had  come. 
Roman  rule  had  brought  peace.  Greek  culture  had  produced 
unity  of  speech.  There  was  a  Greek  world,  there  were  Greek- 
speaking  missionaries,  and  there  was  a  Greek  Bible.  In  the  first 
century,  the  salvation  that  was  of  the  Jews  could  become  a  salva- 
tion for  the  whole  world. 

3.     THE  PAPYRI 

The  world  in  which  the  gospel  was  proclaimed  is  deserving  of 
careful  study.     How  shall  it  be  investigated? 

The  most  obvious  way  is  to  study  the  literature  of  the  period. 
Until  recent  years  that  was  almost  the  only  way.  But  that  method 
is  partial  at  best.  For  literature  is  after  all  but  an  imperfect  measure 
Sen.  t.  m.  1. 


1 8  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

of  any  age.  The  society  that  is  found  in  books  is  an  idealized 
society,  or  at  any  rate  it  is  the  society  of  the  great.  The  plain 
man  is  unrecorded.  His  deeds  are  not  deemed  worthy  of  a  place 
in  history. 

Within  the  last  thirty  years,  however,  the  plain  people  of  the 
ancient  world  have  come  remarkably  into  view.  They  are  revealed 
to  us  in  the  "non-literary  papyri." 

"Papyri"  are  pieces  of  papyrus.  Papyrus  was  the  common 
writing  material  of  antiquity  up  to  about  A.  D.  300,  when  vellum, 
or  parchment,  came  into  general  use.  Unfortunately  papyrus, 
which  was  made  from  the  pith  of  the  papyrus  plant,  is  not  a  very 
durable  substance,  so  that  ancient  papyri  have  been  preserved  until 
modern  times  only  under  exceptionally  favorable  conditions.  These 
conditions  are  found  in  Egypt,  where  the  dry  climate  has  kept  the 
papyrus  from  disintegration. 

In  Egypt,  within  the  last  thirty  years,  have  been  discovered 
large  numbers  of  papyrus  sheets  with  Greek  writing.  Of  these  the 
"literary  papyri"  contain  simply  parts  of  books.  They  differ 
from  other  copies  of  the  works  in  question  only  in  that  they  are 
usually  older  than  the  vellum  manuscripts.  The  "non-literary 
papyri,"  on  the  other  hand,  are  unique.  They  are  private  docu- 
ments of  all  sorts — receipts,  petitions,  wills,  contracts,  census 
returns,  and  most  interesting  of  all,  private  letters.  It  was  usually 
not  intended  that  these  documents  should  be  preserved.  They 
were  simply  thrown  away  upon  rubbish  heaps  or  used  as  wrappings 
of  mummies.     They  have  been  preserved  only  by  chance. 

The  non-literary  papyri  are  important  first  of  all  in  the  study  of 
language.  They  exhibit  the  language  of  everyday  life,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  language  of  literature.  The  language  of 
literature  always  differs  more  or  less  from  the  language  used  on 
the  street,  and  the  difference  was  particularly  wide  in  the  Greek  of 
the  Hellenistic  period.  The  books  of  the  time  were  modeled  to 
a  considerable  extent  upon  the  ancient  classics,  but  the  actual  spoken 
language  had  been  changing.  Hence  the  literary  language  had 
become  exceedingly  artificial. 

Up  to  within  the  last  few  years,  the  literary  language  alone  could 
be  studied.  The  books  of  the  period  were  preserved,  but  the 
language  of  daily  life  was  gone.  Now,  however,  the  papyri  supply 
what  was  lacking.  In  them  there  is  no  attempt  at  style.  They 
are  composed  in  the  language  which  was  employed  in  the  ordinary 
affairs  of  life  and  preserve  the  actual  spoken  language  of  every  day. 


THE  GREEK  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY      19 

At  this  point  a  remarkable  fact  must  be  noticed.  The  language 
of  the  New  Testament  is  more  like  the  language  of  the  non-literary 
papyri  than  it  is  like  the  language  of  contemporary  literature. 
The  papyri  indicate,  therefore,  that  the  New  Testament  is  com- 
posed in  the  natural  living  language  of  the  time  rather  than  accord- 
ing to  the  canons  of  an  artificial  rhetoric.  The  artlessness  of  the 
New  Testament  has  sometimes  been  regarded  as  a  reproach. 
Instead,  it  is  a  cause  for  rejoicing.  The  simplicity  of  the  gospel 
would  only  be  concealed  by  niceties  of  style.  The  greatness  of  the 
New  Testament  is  independent  of  literary  art.  It  would  be  a 
mistake,  however,  to  suppose  that  the  New  Testament,  because  it 
is  composed  in  the  language  of  the  people,  is  characterized  by 
anything  like  cheapness  or  vulgarity.  On  the  contrary  its  simplic- 
ity is  the  noble  simplicity  of  truth.  In  the  New  Testament  the 
spoken  language  of  the  Greco-Roman  world,  in  all  its  living 
freshness,  becomes  a  worthy  vehicle  for  the  sublimest  thoughts. 

The  non-literary  papyri,  then,  reproduce  for  us  the  spoken 
language  of  the  time  as  distinguished  from  the  artificial  language 
of  literature.  But  that  does  not  exhaust  their  importance.  They 
afford  a  knowledge  not  only  of  language,  but  also  of  life.  Through 
them  ordinary  people  are  revealed  in  the  ordinary  relations  of  every 
day.     In  them,  the  ancient  world  has  been  made  to  live  again. 

A  few  examples  (see  the  book  of  Professor  Milligan  mentioned 
at  the  end  of  the  lesson)  will  serve  to  indicate  the  character  of 
the  papyrus  letters. 

The  following  boy's  letter  (of  the  second  or  the  third  century 
alter  Christ)  is  written  in  very  bad  grammar,  but  is  for  that  reason 
all  the  more  lifelike.  (The  translation  is  taken  from  Grenfell  and 
Hunt,  "Oxyrhynchus  Papyri,"  Part  i.,  p.  186.) 

"Theon  to  his  father  Theon,  greeting.  It  was  a  fine  thing  of 
you  not  to  take  me  with  you  to  the  city!  If  you  won't  take  me 
with  you  to  Alexandria  I  won't  write  you  a  letter  or  speak  to  you 
or  say  good-by  to  you ;  and  if  you  go  to  Alexandria  I  won't  take  your 
hand  nor  ever  greet  you  again.  That  is  what  will  happen  if  you 
won't  take  me.  Mother  said  to  Archalaus,  Tt  quite  upsets  him 
to  be  left  behind  (?).'  It  was  good  of  you  to  send  me  presents  .  .  . 
on  the  12th,  the  day  you  sailed.  Send  me  a  lyre,  I  implore  you. 
If  you  don't,  I  won't  eat,  I  won't  drink;   there  now!" 

The  following  invitation  to  dinner,  of  the  second  century  after 
Christ,  throws  light  upon  I  Corinthians  (the  translation  taken 
from  Professor  Milligan): 


20  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

"Antonius,  son  of  Ptolemaeus,  invites  you  to  dine  with  him  at  the 
table  of  the  lord  Serapis  in  the  house  of  Claudius  Serapion  on  the 
16th  at  9  o'clock." 

"The  lord  Serapis"  is  a  god.  Even  an  ordinary  dinner  party 
seems  thus  to  be  regarded  as  the  table  of  Serapis.  Under  such 
conditions  the  Christian  life  must  have  been  hard  to  lead.  No 
wonder  the  Corinthian  Christians  had  to  ask  Paul  questions.  Even 
the  ordinary  affairs  of  life  were  intimately  connected  with  a  false 
religion.  What  should  the  attitude  of  the  Christians  be?  Where 
should  they  draw  the  line  in  associating  with  their  heathen  friends? 

4.     A  REAL  GOSPEL  IN  A  REAL  WORLD 

The  people  that  are  introduced  to  us  so  intimately  in  the  papyri 
are  probably  very  fair  representatives  of  the  people  among  whom 
the  gospel  was  first  proclaimed.  In  that  cosmopolitan  age  the 
society  of  Egyptian  towns  was  probably  not  so  very  different  from 
that  of  Corinth.  The  people  of  the  papyri  are  not  the  great  men  of 
the  time;  they  are  just  plain  folk.  But  the  early  Christians  were 
also  usually  not  of  exalted  social  position,  though  there  were  ex- 
ceptions. "Not  many  wise  after  the  flesh,  not  many  mighty,  not 
many  noble"  were  called.  I  Cor.  1  :  26.  Many  of  the  early  Chris- 
tians were  slaves,  many  were  humble  tradesmen.  The  same  classes 
appear  in  the  papyri.  In  the  papyri  we  are  introduced  into  the 
private  lives  of  the  men  to  whom  the  gospel  was  proclaimed. 
Seeing,  but  unseen,  hidden  as  by  a  magic  cap,  we  watch  them  in 
their  most  intimate  affairs.  And  we  come  away  with  a  new  feeling 
of  the  reality  of  early  Christian  history.  These  men  were  not  so 
very  different  from  ourselves.  They  were  real  men  and  women, 
living  in  a  real  world.     And  they  needed  a  real  gospel. 


In  the  Library. — Hastings,  "  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  extra  vol- 
ume: Ramsay,  article  on  "  Religion  of  Greece,"  pp.  109-156,  especially 
PP-  I35_I56.  Milligan,  "Selections  from  the  Greek  Papyri,"  (with 
translations).  Deissmann,  "The  Philology  of  the  Greek  Bible,"  pp. 
1-63,  144-147.  Ramsay,  "The  Cities  of  St.  Paul,"  pp.  1-47.  Brown- 
ing, "  Cleon,"  (vol.  iv,  pp.  1 15-122  of  the  Riverside  Edition.) 


LESSON  IV 

THE  JEWISH  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

I.     PALESTINIAN  JUDAISM 


1.  SOURCES 

The  New  Testament  is  one  of  the  chief  sources  of  information 
about  the  Palestinian  Judaism  of  the  first  century.  Other  im- 
portant sources  are  the  works  of  Josephus,  a  first-century  Jewish 
historian,  and  the  Mishna.  The  Mishna  is  a  collection  of  Jewish 
interpretations  of  the  Mosaic  law.  In  its  written  form  it  is  thought 
to  have  been  produced  at  the  end  of  the  second  century,  but  it 
contains  a  mass  of  earlier  material  which  had  been  preserved  by 
oral  tradition. 

2.  OUTLINE  OF  JEWISH  HISTORY 

After  the  conclusion  of  the  Old  Testament  period  the  Jewish 
nation  had  undergone  important  changes.  If,  therefore,  the 
Judaism  of  the  first  century  is  to  be  understood,  the  student  must 
have  in  mind  at  least  a  bare  outline  of  the  history  between  the 
Testaments. 

Old  Testament  history  closes  with  the  rebuilding  of  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  and  the  reorganization  of  the  national  life  which  took 
place  under  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  in  the  fifth  century  before 
Christ.  At  that  time  Judah,  or  "Judea,"  was  the  only  part  of 
Palestine  which  was  occupied  by  the  Jews,  and  they  occupied  it 
only  as  vassals — though  with  independence  in  internal  affairs — 
of  the  kings  of  Persia. 

The  Persian  dominion  continued  for  over  a  century.  Then, 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century  before  Christ,  Judea  was 
conquered  by  Alexander  the  Great.  For  some  hundred  years  after 
the  death  of  Alexander,  the  country  was  a  bone  of  contention 
between  the  kings  of  Egypt  and  the  kings  of  Syria — that  is,  between 
the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucids.  At  the  beginning  of  the  second 
century  before  Christ  the  king  of  Syria  won  a  permanent  victory. 

Under  the  Ptolemies  and  at  first  under  the  Seleucids,  as  well  as 
under  the  Persians,  the  Jews  enjoyed  a  considerable  measure  of 
independence  in  the  management  of  their  own  affairs.     Their  re. 

2\ 


22  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

ligion,  in  particular,  was  left  quite  unmolested.  But  the  assimila- 
tion which  was  not  being  accomplished  by  force  was  being  accom- 
plished by  peaceful  influences.  The  all-pervasive  Greek  culture 
of  the  period  was  making  itself  felt  in  Palestine  as  well  as  elsewhere. 
Judea  seemed  to  be  in  danger  of  being  Hellenized. 

Under  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  of  Syria  (175-164  B.  C.), 
however,  the  policy  of  toleration  was  suddenly  interrupted.  Anti- 
ochus tried  to  stamp  out  the  Jewish  religion  by  force.  The  result 
was  a  heroic  uprising  led  by  Mattathias  and  his  sons,  who  are  called 
the  Maccabees.  The  tyranny  of  Antiochus  had  caused  a  mighty 
popular  reaction  against  the  Hellenizing  party  among  the  Jews. 
Devotion  to  the  religion  of  Israel  with  exclusion  of  foreign  influences 
was  ever  afterwards  the  dominant  tendency  in  Jewish  history. 

The  Maccabees  were  at  first  wonderfully  successful  against  over- 
whelming odds;  and  when  the  opposing  forces  seemed  at  last  to 
have  become  too  powerful,  internal  conflicts  at  the  Syrian  court 
gave  the  Jewish  patriots  that  independence  which  they  could 
probably  not  otherwise  have  maintained.  Rulers  belonging  to  the 
Maccabean  dynasty  governed  the  Jewish  nation  for  about  a 
hundred  years,  during  most  of  which  period  they  were  independent. 
Their  territory  at  first  embraced  only  Judea,  but  was  gradually 
enlarged  over  the  other  parts  of  Palestine.  Galilee,  which — since 
the*destruction  of  the  northern  Israelitish  kingdom  centuries  be- 
fore— had  become  predominantly  Gentile,  was  Judaized  under 
Aristobulus  I  in  104-103  B.  C.  Before  the  time  of  Christ  it  had 
become  thoroughly  Jewish. 

Unfortunately  the  worldly  power  of  the  Maccabees  had  brought 
worldliness  of  spirit.  The  first  revolt  had  been  undertaken  from 
a  lofty  religious  motive,  in  order  to  maintain  the  worship  of  Jehovah. 
As  the  years  went  on,  the  Maccabean  rulers  became  increasingly 
engrossed  in  the  extension  of  political  power.  Allying  themselves 
with  the  aristocratic  party  among  the  Jews,  they  came  to  favor 
the  extension  of  those  Greek  influences — though  not  in  the  sphere 
of  religion — which  at  first  they  had  opposed.  Under  Queen  Alex- 
andra (76-67  B.  C.)  it  is  true,  there  was  a  reaction.  The  strictly 
Jewish,  anti-Hellenistic  party  again  became  dominant.  But  under 
Alexandra's  successors  there  was  civil  strife,  and  the  all-conquering 
Romans  found  the  country  an  easy  prey.  Pompey  took  possession 
of  Jerusalem  in  63  B.  C. 

The  years  that  followed  saw  the  gradual  rise  of  the  family  of 
Herod  the  Great,  who,  as  vassal  of  the  Romans,  became  king  of  all 


THE  JEWISH  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY      23 

Palestine  in  37  B.  C.  and  ruled  until  4  B.  C.  Herod  was  an 
Idumsean,  not  a  genuine  Jew.  Idumaea,  however,  the  country 
to  the  south  of  Judah,  had  been  Judaized  some  time  before.  Herod 
was  at  heart  a  Hellenist.  He  built  Greek  theaters  and  amphi- 
theaters not  only  in  the  numerous  Greek  cities  in  or  near  Palestine, 
but  also  in  Jerusalem  itself.  Nevertheless  he  was  wise  enough  to 
support  the  Jewish  religion  and  generally  to  respect  the  customs  of 
the  people.  His  magnificent  rebuilding  of  the  temple  was  probably 
intended  chiefly  to  win  popular  favor. 

At  Herod's  death,  his  territory  was  divided  among  his  sons. 
Archelaus  was  given  Judea,  Antipas — the  "Herod"  of  Jesus' 
public  ministry — received  Galilee  and  Perea,  with  the  title  of  "Te- 
trarch,"  and  Philip  received  certain  territories  to  the  east  of  Galilee. 
Archelaus  was  banished  in  A.  D.  6,  Antipas  was  banished  in  A.  D. 
39,  and  Philip  died  in  A.  D.  33.  After  the  banishment  of  Archelaus, 
Judea  was  administered  by  Roman  procurators  till  A.  D.  41,  when 
all  Palestine  was  given  to  Herod  Agrippa  I.  Acts  12  :  1-4, 
18-23.     After  A.  D.  44,  procurators  were  again  in  control. 

The  misgovernment  of  the  procurators  led  to  the  great  revolt 
in  A.  D.  66.  After  four  years  of  war,  Jerusalem  was  taken  by  the 
Roman  army  in  A.  D.  70.  The  temple  was  destroyed,  and  the 
offering  of  sacrifices  ceased.  The  destruction  of  the  temple  marks 
an  epoch  in  Jewish  history.  Henceforth  the  national  center  was 
gone. 

There  was  another  uprising  in  A.  D.  132-135,  but  that  was  the 
last.  A  Gentile  city  was  erected  on  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem,  and 
for  a  considerable  time  at  least  the  Jews  were  forbidden  even  to 
enter  its  precincts. 

3.  ADMINISTRATION  AND  PARTIES 

After  the  return  from  the  Exile,  the  priests  occupied  a  position 
of  leadership.  The  high  priest,  whose  office  was  hereditary,  was 
practically  head  of  the  Jewish  state.  With  him  was  associated  a 
council,  composed  of  members  of  the  priestly  aristocracy.  This 
state  of  affairs  prevailed  during  the  Persian  and  Greek  periods. 
Under  the  Maccabees  the  power  of  the  high  priest  reached  its 
highest  point.  For  after  a  time  the  Maccabean  rulers  themselves 
assumed  the  title  of  high  priest,  and  still  later  the  title  of  king. 
The  high  priest,  then,  under  the  Maccabees,  was  also  king.  Under 
Herod  the  Great,  on  the  contrary,  the  high  priesthood  sank  to  its 
lowest  ebb.     Herod  made  and  unmade  high  priests  at  pleasure. 


24  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

The  council  associated  with  the  high  priest  was,  under  Alexandra, 
opened  to  the  members  of  the  strict  anti-Hellenistic  party.  At  the 
time  of  Christ  it  included  both  Pharisees  and  Sadducees. 

These  parties  became  distinct  at  the  time  of  the  Maccabees. 
The  Sadducees — the  origin  of  the  name  is  not  altogether  clear — 
were  the  aristocratic  party,  hospitable  to  Greek  culture.  The 
Pharisees  were  the  strict  Jewish  party,  devoted  to  the  law,  and 
opposed  to  foreign  influences.  The  name  "Pharisee"  means 
"separated."  The  Pharisees  were  "separated"  from  the  mass 
of  the  people  by  a  stricter  observance  of  the  Mosaic  law.  At  first 
the  Pharisees  supported  the  Maccabean  leaders;  for  the  Maccabean 
revolt  was  in  the  interests  of  the  Jewish  religion.  But  when  the 
Maccabees  became  engrossed  in  worldly  politics  and  susceptible 
to  Greek  influences  the  Pharisees  opposed  them.  At  the  time  of 
Christ  the  essential  characteristics  of  the  parties  remained  un- 
changed. 

4.  LANGUAGE 

Some  centuries  before  Christ,  Hebrew  had  ceased  to  be  the 
ordinary  language  of  Palestine.  As  the  language  of  the  Old 
Testament  it  continued  to  be  studied.  Old  Testament  passages 
in  Hebrew  were  read  in  the  synagogue.  Hebrew  was  used  also  to 
some  extent  as  the  language  of  learned  discussion.  But  for  all 
ordinary  purposes  its  place  had  been  taken  by  Aramaic,  a  language 
of  the  Semitic  family  closely  related  to  Hebrew.  At  the  time  of 
Christ  Aramaic  was  the  spoken  language  of  the  Palestinian  Jews. 
Even  in  the  synagogues,  the  Old  Testament  passages,  after  having 
been  read  in  Hebrew,  were  translated  orally  into  the  language  which 
the  people  could  understand. 

But,  since  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  another  language  had 
made  its  way  into  Palestine  along  with  Aramaic.  This  was 
the  Greek.  The  kingdoms  into  which  Alexander's  empire  was 
divided  were  Greek  kingdoms.  Two  of  them,  Syria  and  Egypt, 
bore  rule  alternately  over  Palestine.  With  the  Greek  government 
came  Greek  culture  and  the  Greek  language.  Then,  under  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes,  there  was  a  mighty  reaction.  Thereafter  religion, 
at  least,  was  kept  altogether  free  from  Greek  influences. 

In  other  spheres,  however,  under  the  Maccabean  kings  and 
still  more  under  the  Romans,  Greek  culture  effected  an  entrance. 
At  the  time  of  Christ  there  were  typical  Greek  cities  not  only  to 
the  east  of  the  Jordan  in  Decapolis,  where  magnificent  ruins  even 
to-day  attest  the  ancient  Greco-Roman  civilization,  and  not  only 


THE  JEWISH   BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY      25 

along  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  but  even  within  the  confines 
of  Palestine  proper.  With  some  truth  Palestine  in  the  first  century 
may  be  called  a  bilingual  country.  Greek  and  Aramaic  were  both 
in  use. 

Aramaic  was  the  language  of  the  mass  of  the  people.  Many, 
no  doubt,  could  speak  no  other  language.  But  if  a  man  desired 
to  make  his  way  in  the  world  in  any  public  capacity  or  in  trade  he 
would  be  obliged  to  learn  the  cosmopolitan  language  of  the  time. 
No  doubt  very  many  could  speak  both  languages. 

Jesus  and  his  apostles  belonged  to  those  circles  which  were 
least  affected  by  the  encroachments  of  Greek  civilization.  The 
whole  atmosphere  of  the  Gospels  is  as  un-Greek  as  could  be  imagined. 
As  is  proved  by  the  presence  of  Aramaic  words  even  in  our  Greek 
Gospels,  Aramaic  was  undoubtedly  the  language  in  which  the  gospel 
was  originally  proclaimed.  Aramaic  was  the  language  of  Jesus' 
boyhood  home,  and  Aramaic  was  the  language  of  his  intercourse 
with  the  disciples  and  of  his  public  preaching. 

It  is  perfectly  possible,  however,  that  even  Jesus  may  have  used 
Greek  upon  rare  occasions,  for  example  in  conversation  with  Pilate, 
the  Roman  procurator.  His  disciples,  after  the  resurrection,  found 
themselves  at  the  head  of  a  Greek-speaking  community.  The  early 
Church  in  Jerusalem  was  composed  not  only  of  ''Hebrews,"  but 
also  of  "Grecians,"  or  Hellenists.  Acts  6:1.  The  Hellenists 
were  Greek-speaking  Jews  of  the  dispersion  who  were  sojourning 
more  or  less  permanently  in  the  holy  city.  The  apostles  seem  to 
have  entered  upon  their  new  functions  without  difficulty.  Some 
knowledge  of  Greek,  no  doubt,  all  of  them  brought  with  them 
from  their  Galilean  homes,  and  their  knowledge  would  be  increased 
through  practice.  It  is  not  surprising  then  that  several  of  the 
original  apostles  and  two  of  the  brothers  of  Jesus  were  the  authors 
of  Greek  books  of  the  New  Testament. 


In  the  Library. — Riggs,  "A  History  of  the  Jewish  People,"  espe- 
cially pp.  105-116,  143-153,  215-231.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the 
Bible":  articles  on  "Council,"  "Pharisees,"  "Sadducees,"  "Synagogue," 
"  School,"  "  Scribe,"  "Aramaic,"  and  "  Hebrew."  The  outline  of  Jew- 
ish history  and  institutions  which  is  provided  in  the  lesson  helps  for 
this  lesson  and  the  following  is  dependent  especially  upon  the  large 
German  work  of  Schiirer. 


LESSON  V 

THE  JEWISH  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

II.     THE  JUDAISM  OF  THE  DISPERSION 


The  presentation  of  the  lesson  in  class  may  be  begun  somewhat 
in  the  manner  suggested  in  the  Student's  Text  Book.  The  student 
should  be  made  to  appreciate  the  practical  problem  of  a  missionary 
in  a  new  city.  Various  solutions  of  the  problem  may  be  adopted. 
The  missionary  may  simply  engage  in  conversation  with  individuals 
in  the  street,  or  he  may  hire  a  room  and  advertise  his  preaching. 
In  any  case  the  securing  of  an  audience  is  usually  no  easy  matter. 
It  is  difficult  to  know  how  to  begin. 

The  case  might  naturally  have  been  the  same  with  Paul  and  his 
companions  when,  for  example,  after  the  journey  up  from  Perga 
they  arrived  at  Pisidian  Antioch.  Complete  strangers  were 
perhaps  not  much  better  received  in  those  days  than  they  are  now. 
How  could  the  missionaries  get  a  hearing  for  their  message?  In 
some  cases,  they  might  simply  take  their  stand  in  the  market  place 
and  talk  to  the  passers-by.  Paul  tried  that  method  in  Athens. 
It  might  do  when  nothing  better  offered.  But  fortunately  there 
was  usually  a  far  better  opportunity.  The  synagogue  offered  an 
audience.  What  is  more,  it  offered  just  exactly  the  most  promising 
audience  that  could  possibly  have  been  secured. 

The  scene  in  the  synagogue  at  Pisidian  Antioch  is  typical  of 
what  happened  again  and  again.  The  student  should  be  made 
to  appreciate  the  remarkable  liberality  and  informality  of  the 
synagogue  customs.  There  seem  to  have  been  no  set  preachers. 
Any  Jew  who  really  had  a  message  could  be  heard.  He  needed 
only  to  go  in  and  sit  down.  Acts  13  :  14.  Paul  and  Barnabas 
had  no  difficulty  in  making  their  fitness  known.  "Brethren,"  said 
the  rulers  of  the  synagogue,  "if  ye  have  any  word  of  exhortation 
for  the  people,  say  on."  Acts  13  :  15.  They  had  a  word  of  ex- 
hortation indeed.  "Jesus  is  the  Messiah  for  whom  you  are  waiting. 
He  has  died  for  your  sins.  He  has  risen  from  the  dead,  and  is 
now  alive  to  save  you."     It  was  a  powerful  word,  and  it  bore  fruit. 

The  native  Jews,  it  is  true,  soon  came  out  in  opposition.     The 

26 


THE  JEWISH   BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY      2J 

reasons  for  their  opposition  are  not  far  to  seek.  Jealousy  was  an 
important  factor.  Christianity  was  evidently  too  radical  a  thing 
to  be  simply  a  sect  of  Judaism.  If  allowed  to  continue,  it  would 
destroy  the  prerogatives  of  Israel.  It  could  not  be  controlled. 
Its  success  was  too  great.  On  that  next  Sabbath  in  Pisidian 
Antioch,  "almost  the  whole  city  was  gathered  together  to  hear 
the  word  of  God."  The  Jewish  mission  had  never  had  a  success 
like  that.  "When  the  Jews  saw  the  multitudes,  they  were  filled 
with  jealousy."  Christianity  had  taken  away  the  heritage  of 
Israel. 

In  one  way  the  Jewish  opposition  displayed  genuine  insight  into 
the  situation.  Christianity  was  really  destined  to  be  a  fatal  rival 
to  the  older  Judaism.  What  took  place  on  a  small  scale  at  Antioch 
was  repeated  on  the  larger  stage  of  history.  When  the  Christian 
mission  began,  Judaism  was  a  successful  missionary  religion.  Soon 
afterwards  it  had  withdrawn  hopelessly  into  its  age-long  isolation. 
Various  causes  contributed  to  this  result.  The  destruction  of  the 
national  life  in  Palestine  and  the  increasing  influence  of  the  strict 
rabbinical  schools  both  had  an  important  part.  But  at  least  one 
factor  in  the  process  was  the  competition  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Christianity  offered  the  world  everything  that  Judaism  could  offer, 
and  more.  It  offered  the  knowledge  of  the  one  God,  and  the  lofty 
morality,  and  the  authoritative  Book.  In  addition,  it  offered  a 
way  of  redemption — and  the  men  of  that  time  were  preeminently 
seekers  after  redemption — through  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  It 
offered  all  these  things,  moreover,  without  requiring  any  relinquish- 
ment of  purely  national  characteristics.  Christianity  did  not  de- 
mand union  with  any  one  race.     It  had  a  gospel  for  the  world. 

No  wonder,  then,  that  those  who  had  been  attracted  by  Judaism 
now  became  adherents  of  Christianity.  The  Jews  were  filled  with 
envy.  It  was  natural  from  their  point  of  view,  but  it  was  a  sad 
mistake.  Had  they  themselves  accepted  the  gospel,  the  gospel 
would  have  been  to  their  glory.  How  glorious  was  the  mission  of 
Israel!  A  blessing  to  the  whole  world!  Far  better  than  any 
narrow  particularism!  But  they  were  not  willing  to  accept  the 
message.  Nevertheless,  despite  their  opposition,  the  Church 
should  not  forget  the  debt  which  she  owes  to  Israel.  The  dispersion 
was  like  the  J  udaism  of  Palestine.  I  n  both  cases  the  men  themselves 
were  opposed  to  the  gospel.  But  in  boch  cases  they  had  preserved 
the  deposit  of  divine  truth.  Judaism,  despite  itself,  opened  the 
way  for  the  Christian  Church. 


$8  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

One  service  which  the  dispersion  rendered  to  Christianity  has 
been  illustrated  by  the  scene  at  Pisidian  Antioch.  That  service 
was  the  providing  of  an  audience.  Another  service  "was  the  assur- 
ance of  legal  protection.  This  may  be  illustrated  by  another 
incident  in  The  Acts — the  appeal  to  Gallio.  Acts  18  :  12-17. 
There  the  opposition  of  the  Jews  appears  in  all  its  bitterness.  No 
doubt  that  opposition  was  a  serious  hindrance  to  the  work  of  the 
Church.  Just  because  Christianity  was  regarded  as  a  Jewish  sect, 
the  Christians  were  subject  to  persecution  by  the  Jewish  authorities. 
But  persecutions  by  the  Jews,  annoying  though  they  were,  were 
far  less  serious  than  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  Roman  authorities. 
And  the  latter  was,  at  first,  conspicuously  absent*  Gallio's  deci- 
sion is  a  fair  example  of  the  general  attitude  of  the  Roman 
magistrates.  Christianity,  as  a  Jewish  sect,  was  allowed  to  go  its 
way.     Judaism,  despite  itself,  afforded  the  Church  legal  protection. 

Beginning  with  these  two  striking  scenes,  the  teacher  may 
proceed  to  the  more  general  presentation  of  the  lesson.  In  what 
follows,  the  outline  of  the  Student's  Text  Book  will  be  supple- 
mented at  one  or  two  points. 

1.  THE  CAUSES  AND  EXTENT  OF  THE  DISPERSION 

Deportations  of  Jews  to  foreign  countries  took  place  at  various 
times.  The  most  famous  of  those  deportations  was  carried  out 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  after  his  conquest  of  Judah,  about  600  B.  C. 
Many  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  captives  did  not  join  in  the  return  under 
the  Persian  monarchy,  but  remained  permanently  in  the  east  and 
formed  the  nucleus  of  the  large  Jewish  population  of  Mesopotamia. 
When  Pompey  conquered  Palestine  in  the  first  century  before 
Christ,  he  carried  many  Jews  as  slaves  to  Rome.  Afterwards  they 
were  liberated,  and  formed  a  large  Jewish  colony  at  the  capital  of 
the  empire.  These  are  merely  examples.  Part  of  the  dispersion 
was  due  to  forcible  exile. 

Other  causes  have  been  mentioned  in  the  Student's  Text  Book. 
It  is  a  question,  however,  whether  all  of  these  causes  combined  are 
sufficient  to  account  for  the  extraordinary  growth  of  the  dispersion. 
Schurer  believes  that  the  vastness  of  the  Jewish  population  presup- 
poses the  merging  of  large  bodies  of  proselytes  into  the  Jewish 
people.  He  also  believes,  however,  that  these  thoroughgoing  con- 
versions were  less  numerous  in  New  Testament  times  than  they 
had  been  before. 

Harnack  calculates  that  at  the  time  of  the  death  of  Augustus 


THE  JEWISH  BACKGROUND  OF  CHRISTIANITY      29 

there  were  from  four  million  to  four  and  a  half  million  Jews  in 
the  Roman  Empire,  including  about  seven  hundred  thousand  in 
Palestine,  and  that,  if  that  estimate  be  correct,  then  the  Jews 
formed  perhaps  some  seven  per  cent  of  the  total  population.  Of 
course,  Harnack  is  himself  the  first  to  admit  that  such  calcula- 
tions are  exceedingly  uncertain.  But  so  much  at  least  is  clear — 
the  Jews  in  the  first  century  were  surprisingly  numerous. 

2.  THE  SEPTUAGINT  TRANSLATION  AND  THE  LANGUAGE  OF 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

The  name  "Septuagint,"  derived  from  the  Latin  word  for 
"seventy,"  has  been  applied  to  the  Alexandrian  translation  of  the 
Old  Testament  in  reference  to  an  ancient  story  about  its  origin. 
According  to  this  story,  the  translation  was  made  by  seventy-two 
men  summoned  from  Jerusalem  by  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  king  of 
Egypt,  in  order  to  add  the  Jewish  law  to  the  royal  library  at  Alex- 
andria. The  story  is  certainly  not  true  in  details,  and  is  probably 
not  even  correct  in  representing  the  translation  as  destined  primarily 
for  the  royal  library.  More  probably  the  translation  was  intended 
for  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  of  Egypt. 

The  Septuagint  is  a  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament 
into  the  Greek  world  language  of  the  period,  and  into  the  popular, 
spoken  form  of  that  language,  not  into  the  literary  form.  The 
translation  differs  widely  in  character  in  the  different  books,  for 
many  different  translators  had  a  part  in  it.  Some  of  the  books  are 
translated  with  such  slavish  literalness  as  to  be  almost  unintelligible 
to  a  Greek.  Everywhere,  indeed,  the  influence  of  the  Hebrew 
original  makes  itself  felt  to  some  degree.  Hebrew  idioms  are  often 
copied  in  the  translation  instead  of  being  remolded  according  to  the 
peculiarities  of  the  Greek  language. 

The  Septuagint  exerted  an  important  influence  upon  the  language 
of  the  New  Testament.  The  Septuagint  was  the  Greek  Bible  of 
the  New  Testament  writers,  and  the  influence  of  a  Bible  upon 
language  is  very  strong.  A  good  example  is  afforded  by  the  influence 
of  the  King  James  Version  upon  the  whole  development  of  modern 
English.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  as  the  Septuagint 
was  influenced  by  Hebrew,  so  the  language  of  the  New  Testament 
also  displays  a  Semitic  coloring.  That  coloring  was  induced  partly 
by  the  Septuagint,  but  it  was  also  induced  in  other  ways.  Part  of 
the  New  Testament,  for  example  the  words  of  Jesus,  goes  back 
ultimately    to   an   Aramaic   original.    All    the    New   Testament 


30  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

writers  except  one  were  Jews,  and  had  spoken  Aramaic  as  well  as 
Greek.  No  wonder,  then,  that  their  Greek  was  influenced  by  the 
Semitic  languages.  This  Semitic  influence  upon  the  language  of 
the  New  Testament  is  not  so  great  as  was  formerly  supposed,  but 
it  cannot  be  ignored.  The  New  Testament  is  written  in  the  natural, 
non-literary  form  of  the  Greek  world  language.  That  is  the  main 
thing  to  be  said.  But  upon  this  base  is  superposed  an  appreciable 
influence  of  Hebrew  and  Aramaic. 

The  importance  of  the  Septuagint  for  the  early  Christian  mission 
was  inestimable.  Every  pioneer  missionary  knows  how  difficult 
it  is  to  create  the  vocabulary  necessary  to  express  new  religious 
ideas.  In  the  case  of  the  earliest  Christian  mission,  that  labor  had 
already  been  done.  It  had  been  done  by  the  Jews  of  Alexandria. 
By  the  Septuagint,  the  great  ideas  of  the  Old  Testament — and 
upon  these  ideas  Christianity  was  based — had  already  been  put 
into  a  Greek  form.  The  Christian  Church  needed  only  to  develop 
what  had  been  begun.  The  Church  made  good  use  of  her  opportu- 
nity. The  influence  of  the  Septuagint  upon  the  religious  vocabulary 
of  the  New  Testament  writers  was  profound.  The  Septuagint  had 
provided  a  vocabulary  which  was  understood  already  by  great 
masses  of  people — by  the  Jews  of  the  dispersion  and  by  the  hosts 
of  the  "God-worshipers"  who  attended  the  synagogues.  Naturally 
the  Christian  missionaries  used  the  words  which  people  could 
understand. 

3.  CONCLUSION 

The  Judaism  of  the  dispersion  was  a  wonderful  preparation  for 
the  gospel.  Israel  ought  to  be  regarded  with  gratitude  and  sym- 
pathy.    But  the  ultimate  object  of  gratitude  is  God. 

The  Church  was  founded  in  a  time  of  opportunity.  The  Roman 
Government  had  brought  peace.  The  Greek  language  had  welded 
the  nations  together.  The  dispersion  of  the  Jews  had  prepared  the 
way.  These  things  did  not  come  by  chance.  The  nations  were  in- 
struments in  the  hand  of  God.  But  instruments  for  what?  A 
mighty,  age-long  plan!  Centuries  of  preparation!  At  last  the 
Saviour  came.  But  did  he  come  for  naught?  Or  is  he  Saviour 
of  you  and  me? 


In  the  Library. — Edersheim  (revised  by  White),  "History  of  the 
Jewish  Nation,"' pp.  45-79.  "The  Jewish  Encyclopedia":  Reinach, 
article  on  "  Diaspora."  Hastings,  "  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  ":  Schiirer, 
article  on  "  Diaspora,"  extra  volume,  pp.  91-109. 


LESSON  VI 

THE  MESSIAH 


The  teaching  of  this  lesson  may  be  begun  with  Acts  2  :  17-21. 
Surely  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  was 
something  new.  Yet  even  that  was  explained  by  a  reference  to 
prophecy.    And  the  reference  is  of  remarkable  aptness  and  beauty. 

The  Pentecostal  speech  of  Peter  is  full  of  the  appeal  to  prophecy. 
Primarily,  indeed,  the  claims  of  Jesus  are  supported  by  the  direct 
testimony  to  his  resurrection.  Without  the  facts,  of  course  appeal 
to  prophecy  would  have  been  useless;  for  it  was  just  the  wonderful 
correspondence  of  the  facts  with  the  prophecies  that  could  induce 
belief.  Along  with  the  direct  testimony  to  the  facts  went  the  appeal 
to  prophecy.  The  promised  king  of  David's  line  at  last  has  come. 
Acts  2  :  30;  II  Sam.  7  :  12,  13;  Ps.  89  :  3,  4;  132  :  11.  And 
David's  son  is  David's  Lord — David's  Lord  and  ours.  Acts  2  :  34, 
35;  Ps.  110  :  1;  compare  Matt.  22  :  41-46. 

1.     THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  APPEAL  TO  PROPHECY 

This  speech  of  Peter  is  typical  of  the  preaching  of  the  early 
Church.  The  appeal  to  prophecy  was  absolutely  central  in  the 
presentation  of  the  gospel.  Proof  of  that  fact  does  not  need  to  be 
sought.  It  is  written  plain  on  the  pages  of  the  New  Testament. 
Old  Testament  prophecy  was  found  to  apply  not  merely  to  one  side 
of  the  work  of  Christ,  but  to  all  sides.  Israel  had  looked  not 
merely  for  a  king,  but  also  for  a  prophet  and  a  priest.  Peter,  after 
his  first  arrest,  for  example,  could  appeal  to  the  notable  prophecy 
of  Deuteronomy:  "A  prophet  shall  the  Lord  God  raise  up  unto 
you  from  among  your  brethren,  like  unto  me."  Acts  3  :  22;  Deut. 
18  :  15,  19.  The  author  of  Hebrews  could  appeal  to  the  priest 
after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,  Heb.  5:6;  Ps.  110  :  4,  and  to  the 
symbolic  sacrifices  of  the  temple  which  found  their  fulfillment  on 
Calvary. 

The  appeal  to  prophecy  extended  even  to  those  things  which 
were  most  distinctive  of  the  Christian  message.  "I  delivered  unto 
you  first  of  all,''  says  Paul,  "that  which  also  I  received:  that  Christ 
died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  scriptures;    and  that  he  was 

3i 


32  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

buried;  and  that  he  hath  been  raised  on  the  third  day  according 
to  the  scriptures."  I  Cor.  15  :  3,  4.  Here  the  death  and  the  res- 
urrection of  Christ  are  both  declared  to  be  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures. That  means  that  they  were  the  subject  of  prophecy.  But 
the  death  and  the  resurrection  of  Christ  were  the  fundamental 
elements  of  the  gospel.  The  gospel,  then,  in  the  form  of  prophecy, 
is  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament. 

What  Old  Testament  passages  has  Paul  here  in  mind?  With  re- 
gard to  the  death  for  our  sins,  the  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah  was 
probably  in  his  mind.  That  passage  was  being  read  by  the  Ethio- 
pian when  Philip  met  him,  and  Philip  made  the  passage  a  basis  for 
preaching  about  Jesus.  Acts  8  :  27-35.  With  regard  to  the  resur- 
rection, it  is  natural  to  think  of  Ps.  16  :  10.  Paul  himself  quoted 
that  passage  in  his  speech  at  Pisidian  Antioch.     Acts  13  :  34-37. 

The  appeal  to  prophecy  did  not  begin  with  the  apostles.  It  was 
initiated  by  Jesus  himself.  "To-day,"  said  Jesus  at  Nazareth 
after  the  reading  of  Isa.  61  :  1,  2,  "hath  this  scripture  been  fulfilled 
in  your  ears."  A  large  claim!  No  wonder  they  found  it 
difficult  to  accept.  When  John  the  Baptist  asked,  "Art  thou  he 
that  cometh,  or  look  we  for  another?"  it  was  to  "the  works  of  the 
Christ"  that  Jesus  appealed.  Matt.  11  :  2-6;  Isa.  35  :  5,  6;  61  :  1. 
These  are  merely  examples.  Throughout,  Jesus  represented  him- 
self and  his  kingdom  as  the  fulfillment  of  the  ancient  promise. 
"0  foolish  men,"  he  said  to  the  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus, 
"and  slow  of  heart  to  believe  in  all  that  the  prophets  have  spoken! 
Behooved  it  not  the  Christ  to  suffer  these  things,  and  to  enter  into 
his  glory?  And  beginning  from  Moses  and  from  all  the  prophets, 
he  interpreted  to  them  in  all  the  scriptures  the  things  concerning 
himself."     Luke  24  :  25-27. 

2.     THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  A  PREPARATION  FOR  THE  GOSPEL 

When  the  gospel  was  preached  to  pure  Gentiles,  a  great  deal 
of  preliminary  labor  had  to  be  done.  Under  what  title  should  the 
claims  of  the  Saviour  be  presented?  "Christ"  to  the  Gentiles  was 
almost  meaningless,  till  explained.  "Son  of  God"  was  open  to  sad 
misconception.  There  were  "sons  of  God"  in  Greek  mythology, 
but  they  were  not  what  the  early  Christians  meant  to  show  that 
Jesus  was.  These  difficulties  were  overcome,  and  speedily.  Gentile 
Christians  were  imbued  with  a  lofty  and  adequate  conception  of 
the  Lord.     The  labor  was  great,  but  it  was  gloriously  accomplished. 

In  this  labor,  however,  the  missionaries  were  assisted  by  the 


THE  MESSIAH  33 

synagogues  of  the  Jews.  In  the  synagogues,  "  Christ"  was  no 
new  term,  and  no  new  conception.  In  the  synagogues,  one  prop- 
osition needed  first  to  be  proved,  "  This  Jesus  ...  is  the 
Christ."  Acts  17  :  3.  If  that  were  proved,  then  the  rest  would 
follow.  The  Jews  knew  that  the  Messiah  was  Lord  and  Master. 
Identify  Jesus  with  him,  and  all  the  lofty  claims  of  Jesus  would  be 
substantiated.  How  the  identity  was  established  may  be  observed 
in  the  speech  of  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  or  in  the  speech  of 
Paul  at  Pisidian  Antioch.    Acts  13  :  16-43. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  synagogues  attracted  not  merely 
Jews  but  also  Gentiles.  The  Gentile  "God-fearers,"  as  well  as 
the  Jews,  were  acquainted  with  the  Messianic  hope.  Even  the 
Gentile  mission,  therefore,  was  prepared  for  by  the  prophets  of 

Israel. 

3.     THE  PERMANENT  VALUE  OF  PROPHECY 

The  appeal  to  prophecy,  however,  was  not  merely  valuable  to 
the  early  Church.  It  is  of  abiding  worth.  It  represents  Jesus  as 
the  culmination  of  a  divine  purpose.  The  hope  of  Israel  was  in 
itself  a  proof  of  revelation,  because  it  was  so  unlike  the  religious 
conceptions  of  other  nations.  The  covenant  people,  the  righteous 
king,  the  living  God,  the  world-wide  mission — that  is  the  glory  of 
Israel.  The  promise  is  itself  a  proof.  But  still  more  the  fulfill- 
ment. The  fulfillment  was  an  unfolding.  Wonderful  corres- 
pondence in  detail — and  far  more  wonderful  the  correspondence  of 
the  whole!  The  promise  was  manifold.  Sometimes  the  Messiah 
is  in  the  foreground.  Sometimes  he  is  out  of  sight.  Sometimes 
there  is  a  human  king,  sometimes  Jehovah  himself  coming  to  judg- 
ment; sometimes  a  kingdom,  sometimes  a  new  covenant  in  the 
heart;  sometimes  a  fruitful  Canaan,  sometimes  a  new  heaven  and 
a  new  earth.  But  manifold  though  the  promise,  Christ  is  the  ful- 
fillment of  it  all.  "How  many  soever  be  the  promises  of  God," 
in  Christ  is  the  yea.  II  Cor.  1  :  20.  There  is  the  wonder.  In 
Christ  the  apparent  contradictions  of  the  promise  become  glorious 
unity,  in  Christ  the  deeper  mysteries  of  the  promise  are  revealed. 
Christ  the  keystone  of  the  arch!  Christ  the  culmination  of  a 
divine  plan!  That  is  the  witness  of  the  prophets.  It  is  a  witness 
worth  having. 

4.     THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  OF  LATER  JUDAISM 

After  the  close  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  promise  did  not  die. 
It  was  preserved  in  the  Scriptures.     It  continued  to  be  the  life  of 
Sen.  t.  in.  1. 


34  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

the  Jewish  nation.  But  it  was  not  only  preserved.  It  was  also 
interpreted.  Some  of  the  interpretation  was  false,  but  much  of 
it  was  true.  The  Jewish  interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament 
promise  is  worthy  of  attention.  What  did  the  Jews  of  the  first 
century  mean  by  the  Messiah,  and  what  did  they  mean  by  the 
Messianic  age? 

In  the  first  place,  they  retained  the  hope  of  a  king  of  David's 
line — a  human  king  who  should  conquer  the  enemies  of  Israel. 
When  it  was  held  in  a  one-sided  form  this  was  a  dangerous  hope. 
It  led  logically  to  materialistic  conceptions  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
and  to  political  unrest.  It  led  to  the  effort  of  the  Jews  to  take 
Jesus  by  force  and  make  him  a  king.  John  6  :  15.  It  led  to  the 
quarrel  of  the  disciples  about  the  chief  places  in  the  kingdom. 
Matt.  18  :  1-4;  Mark  9  :  33-35;  Luke  9  :  46,  47.  This  conception 
of  the  Messiah  had  to  be  corrected  by  Jesus.  "My  kingdom  is  not 
of  this  world."    John  18  :  36. 

Yet  even  where  the  Messiah  was  conceived  of  as  an  earthly 
ruler,  the  spiritual  hope  was  by  no  means  always  and  altogether 
lost.  The  "Psalms  of  Solomon,"  for  example,  Pharisaic  psalms  of 
the  first  century  before  Christ,  though  they  look  for  an  earthly 
ruler,  picture  him  as  one  who  shall  rule  in  righteousness.  "And  a 
righteous  king  and  taught  of  God  is  he  that  reigneth  over  them; 
And  there  shall  be  no  iniquity  in  his  days  in  their  midst,  for  all  shall 
be  holy  and  their  king  is  the  Lord  Messiah"  (Ps.  Sol.  xvii,  35,  36. 
See  Ryle  and  James,  "Psalms  of  the  Pharisees,"  especially  pp.  137- 
147).  No  iniquity  in  the  days  of  the  Messiah!  That  is  true  under- 
standing of  the  Old  Testament,  even  joined  with  the  political  ideal. 

In  the  second  place,  however,  the  Messianic  age  is  sometimes  in 
later  Judaism  conceived  of  as  purely  supernatural.  The  Messiah 
is  not  an  earthly  ruler,  merely  helped  by  God,  but  himself  a  heavenly 
being,  a  preexistent  "Son  of  Man,"  judge  of  all  the  earth.  The 
Messianic  age  is  ushered  in  not  by  human  warfare,  but  by  a  mighty 
catastrophic  act  of  God.  Not  a  liberated  Canaan  is  here  the  ideal, 
but  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth. 

This  transcendental,  super  naturalistic  form  of  the  Messianic 
hope  appears  in  the  "Book  of  Enoch"  and  other  "apocalypses." 
Its  details  are  fantastic,  but  it  was  by  no  means  altogether  wrong. 
In  many  respects  it  was  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  divine 
promise.  The  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth  are  derived  from 
Isa.  65  :  17.  The  doctrine  of  the  two  ages  was  accepted  by  Jesus 
and  by  Paul— for  example  Matt.  12  :  32;  Gal.  1  :  4;  Eph.  1  :  21. 


THE  MESSIAH  35 

The  heavenly  "Son  of  Man"  goes  back  to  Dan.  7  :  13,  14.  The 
Book  of  Enoch  was  not  altogether  wrong.  Its  use  of  the  title 
"Son  of  Man"  prepared  for  the  title  which  Jesus  used. 

Finally,  the  Messianic  hope  was  held  in  a  pure  and  lofty  form  by 
the  "poor  of  the  land" — simple  folk  like  those  who  appear  in  the 
first  two  chapters  of  Luke.  In  the  hymns  of  Mary  and  Zacharias 
and  Simeon,  purely  political  and  materialistic  conceptions  are  in 
the  background,  and  the  speculations  of  the  apocalypses  do  not 
appear.  The  highest  elements  of  prophecy  are  made  prominent. 
"For  mine  eyes  have  seen  thy  salvation,  which  thou  hast  prepared 
before  the  face  of  all  peoples;  a  light  for  revelation  to  the  Gentiles, 
and  the  glory  of  thy  people  Israel."  Luke  2  :  30-32.  In  those 
circles,  the  hope  of  Israel  burned  still  and  pure. 

Later  Judaism  thus  preserved  the  manifoldness  of  prophecy. 
There  was  exaggeration  and  there  was  one-sidedness;  but  in  Juda- 
ism as  a  whole  the  promise  was  preserved.  One  element  at  most 
was  forgotten — the  suffering  servant  and  his  sacrificial  death. 
The  death  of  the  Messiah  was  no  easy  conception.  The  disciples 
had  difficulty  with  it.  When  Peter  heard  of  it,  he  took  Jesus,  and 
began  to  rebuke  him.  Matt.  16  :  22.  The  lesson  was  not  easy, 
but  it  had  to  be  learned.  And  it  was  worth  learning.  The  cross  is 
the  heart  of  the  gospel. 

Thus  in  Jesus  nothing  was  left  out,  except  what  was  false. 
The  whole  promise  was  preserved.  The  revealer  of  God,  the  ruler 
of  the  kingdom,  the  great  high  priest,  the  human  deliverer,  the 
divine  Lord — these  are  the  elements  of  the  promise.  They  find 
their  union  in  Christ.  Leave  one  out,  and  the  promise  is  mutilated. 
Such  mutilation  is  popular  to-day.  The  whole  Christ  seems  too 
wonderful.     But  the  Church  can  be  satisfied  with  nothing  less. 


In  the  Library. — Beecher,  "The  Prophets  and  the  Promise,"  pp. 
173-420. 


LESSON  VII 
THE  BOOK  OF  THE  ACTS 


The  teaching  of  the  lesson  may  be  begun  with  some  very  simple 
questions.  If  rightly  put,  they  will  open  up  a  fresh  way  of  looking 
at  a  New  Testament  book.  The  way  will  thus  be  prepared  for 
considering  the  deeper  elements  of  the  lesson.  If  interest  can  be 
aroused  in  the  book  itself,  the  contents  of  the  book,  in  the  lessons 
which  follow,  will  be  studied  with  much  livelier  attention. 

1.     AUTHORSHIP 

Who  wrote  the  book  of  The  Acts?  How  do  you  know?  The 
former  question  will  probably  be  answered  without  difficulty,  but 
the  latter  may  reveal  difference  of  opinion.  Many  of  the  students 
will  know  that  The  Acts  was  written  by  the  same  man  as  the  Gospel 
of  Luke.  But  that  does  not  settle  the  question.  How  do  you  know 
that  Luke  was  written  by  Luke?  The  name  does  not  occur  in  the 
Gospel  itself.  The  title,  ''According  to  Luke,"  was  probably 
added  later.  So,  in  order  to  determine  the  authorship  both  of 
Luke  and  of  The  Acts,  recourse  must  be  had  to  Christian  tradition. 

Fortunately,  however,  tradition  in  this  case  is  quite  unimpeach- 
able. 

In  the  first  place,  although  the  author  of  The  Acts  is  not  named 
in  the  book,  yet  the  book  is  not  an  anonymous  work.  Undoubtedly 
the  name  of  the  author  was  known  from  the  beginning.  For  the 
book  is  dedicated  to  an  individual,  Theofhilus.  Evidently 
Theophilus  knew  who  the  author  was.  Information  about  the 
author  could  thus  be  had  from  the  start.  If,  therefore,  Luke 
did  not  really  write  The  Acts,  some  one  has  removed  the  name 
of  the  true  author  and  substituted  "Luke"  in  place  of  it.  That 
is  an  exceedingly  unlikely  supposition. 

In  the  second  place,  it  is  evident  quite  independently  of  any 
tradition  that  the  book  was  written  by  an  eyewitness  of  part  of 
Paul's  missionary  journeys.  This  fact  appears  from  the  so-called 
"we-sections"  of  the  book.  In  certain  portions  of  the  narrative 
the  author  uses  the  first  person  instead  of  the  third.     Of  this  pe- 

36 


THE  BOOK  OF  THE  ACTS  37 

culiarity  there  is  only  one  satisfactory  explanation.  The  author 
uses  the  first  person  when  he  is  describing  the  experiences  in  which 
he  himself  had  a  part.  When,  for  example,  the  author  says,  not, 
"They  made  a  straight  course  to  Samothrace,"  but  "We  made  a 
straight  course,"  Acts  16  :  11,  he  means  that  he  was  present  on 
that  voyage.  This  natural  supposition  is  confirmed  by  the  char- 
acter of  the  "we-sections."  These  sections  are  full  of  such  a  wealth 
of  artless  detail  that  no  one  but  an  eyewitness  could  possibly  have 
written  them. 

The  only  possible  way  of  avoiding  the  conclusion  that  a  com- 
panion of  Paul  wrote  the  book  of  The  Acts  is  to  maintain  that 
although  such  a  man  wrote  the  "we-sections"  some  one  else  wrote 
the  rest  of  the  book.  But  that  is  unlikely  in  the  extreme.  If  a  later 
author  had  been  simply  using  as  a  source  a  diary  of  a  companion 
of  Paul,  he  would  surely  either  have  told  us  he  was  quoting,  or  else 
have  changed  the  first  person  to  the  third.  By  leaving  the  third 
person  in  he  would  simply  have  been  producing  nonsense.  Everyone 
knew  who  the  author  of  the  book  was.  The  book  is  dedicated  to 
a  definite  man.  The  author  evidently  could  not  have  palmed  him- 
self off  as  a  companion  of  Paul  even  if  he  would.  And  if  he  desired 
to  do  it,  he  would  not  have  chosen  this  remarkable  way  of  doing 
it.  Of  course  if  he  had  been  a  mere  thoughtless  compiler  he  might 
have  copied  his  source  with  such  slavish  exactness  as  to  leave  the 
"we"  in  without  noticing  that  in  the  completed  work  it  would 
produce  nonsense.  But  he  was  most  assuredly  not  a  mere  com- 
piler. If  he  used  sources,  he  did  not  use  them  that  way.  The  book 
shows  a  remarkable  unity  of  style.  Modern  research  has  demon- 
strated that  fact  beyond  peradventure.  There  is  a  remarkable 
similarity  of  style  between  the  "we-sections"  and  the  rest  of  the 
book.  Only  one  hypothesis,  then,  does  justice  to  the  facts.  The 
author  of  the  "we-sections"  was  also  the  author  of  the  whole  book. 
When  he  comes  to  those  parts  of  the  narrative  in  which  he  himself 
had  a  part,  he  says  very  naturally  "we,"  instead  of  "they." 

The  book  of  The  Acts,  then,  was  written  by  a  companion  of 
Paul.  That  fact  stands  firm,  even  apart  from  any  tradition.  And 
that  is  the  really  important  fact.  If  the  book  was  written  by  an 
eyewitness,  the  particular  name  of  the  eyewitness  is  comparatively 
unimportant.  But  the  tradition  as  to  the  name  is  without  doubt 
correct.  There  is  not  the  slightest  reason  for  calling  it  in  question. 
What  the  book  of  The  Acts  itself  says  about  its  author  fits  exactly 
what  Paul  says  about  Luke. 


38  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

2.     DATE 

The  authorship  of  The  Acts  is  certain.  The  date,  however,  is 
not  so  clear.  The  book  was  written  by  Luke.  But  when  was  it 
written?  The  latter  question  cannot  be  answered  with  perfect  pre- 
cision. At  least,  however,  since  the  book  was  written  by  Luke,  it 
must  have  been  written  during  the  lifetime  of  a  companion  of  Paul. 
A.  D.  100,  for  example,  would  be  too  late,  and  A.  D.  90  would  be  un- 
likely. A  good  deal  can  be  said  for  putting  the  date  at  about  A.D. 
63.     This  early  date  would  explain  the  abrupt  ending  of  the  book. 

One  of  the  most  curious  things  about  The  Acts  is  that  the 
narrative  is  suddenly  broken  off  just  at  the  most  interesting 
point.  The  trial  of  Paul  is  narrated  at  very  great  length,  but  we 
are  not  told  how  it  came  out.  The  final  decision,  the  climax  of 
the  whole  long  narrative,  is  just  at  hand;  but  with  regard  to  it 
we  are  left  altogether  in  suspense.  Was  Paul  released?  Was  he 
condemned  and  executed?  The  author  does  not  say.  His  silence 
requires  an  explanation. 

The  simplest  explanation  would  be  that  Luke  wrote  his  book 
at  the  very  point  of  time  where  the  narrative  is  broken  off.  Of 
course  he  could  not  tell  us  any  more  if  nothing  more  had  happened. 
He  brought  his  narrative  right  up  to  date.  Nothing  more  was 
possible. 

It  is  true,  other  explanations  may  be  proposed. 

(a)  It  has  been  suggested,  for  example,  that  The  Acts  closes  so 
abruptly  because  the  author  was  saving  something  for  another 
work.  As  The  Acts  is  the  continuation  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke, 
so  a  third  work,  it  is  said,  was  planned  as  the  continuation  of  The 
Acts.  But  even  so,  it  seems  rather  strange  that  the  author  should 
not  have  given  at  least  a  hint  of  the  outcome  of  that  trial  in  order 
to  take  the  edge  off  our  curiosity.  He  has  done  something  like 
that  at  the  conclusion  of  his  Gospel ;  why  not  also  at  the  conclusion 
of  The  Acts? 

(b)  But  perhaps  the  ending  is  not  so  abrupt  as  it  looks.  The 
author's  purpose,  it  is  said,  was  not  to  write  a  biography  of  Paul, 
but  to  show  how  the  gospel  spread  from  Jerusalem  to  Rome.  When 
Rome  was  reached,  then  the  narrative  was  broken  off.  Biographical 
details — even  the  most  interesting  details  about  the  most  interesting 
character — were  ruthlessly  excluded.  The  plan  of  the  book  had 
been  accomplished.  For  this  explanation  there  is  much  to  be  said. 
But  the  trouble  with  it  is  that  especially  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
book  the  author  as  a  matter  of  fact  does  show  considerable  interest  in 


THE  BOOK  OF  THE  ACTS  39 

biographical  details.  The  trial  and  shipwreck  of  Paul  are  narrated 
with  a  fullness  which  is  quite  out  of  proportion  to  the  rest  of  the 
history.  After  such  a  full  account  of  the  trial,  it  remains  rather 
strange  that  the  author  has  said  not  a  word  about  the  outcome. 

Either  of  these  last  two  explanations  is  perfectly  possible. 
Possibly  The  Acts  was  written  as  late  as  A.  D.  80.  But  theearly 
date  at  least  explains  the  peculiar  ending  best  of  all. 

3.  SOURCES 

Where  did  Luke  get  the  materials  for  his  work?  Did  he  use 
written  sources  as  well  as  oral  information?  The  question  has  been 
discussed  at  very  great  length,  but  without  much  uniformity  in 
the  results.  If  he  used  written  sources,  at  least  he  used  them  skill- 
fully, placing  upon  them  the  imprint  of  his  own  style.  The  book 
possesses  genuine  unity. 

The  really  important  fact  about  the  sources  of  the  book  of  The 
Acts  is  a  negative  fact.  Whatever  the  sources  were,  the  Pauline 
epistles  were  not  among  them.  Compare  the  passages  where 
Paul  and  Luke  narrate  the  same  events — for  example  Gal.,  chs. 
1,  2,  with  the  corresponding  passages  in  The  Acts — and  it  becomes 
evident  that  the  two  narratives  are  entirely  independent.  Luke 
did  not  use  the  Pauline  epistles  in  writing  his  book.  That  is  an 
exceedingly  significant  fact.  It  shows  that  The  Acts  is  an  in- 
dependent witness.  What  is  more,  it  strengthens  materially  the 
argument  for  the  early  date  of  The  Acts.  The  Pauline  epistles 
at  a  very  early  time  began  to  be  collected  and  used  generally  in  the 
Church.  In  A.  D.  100,  for  example,  they  would  certainly  have 
been  used  by  anyone  who  was  writing  an  account  of  Paul's  life. 
Since,  therefore,  the  book  of  The  Acts  does  not  use  them,  that  book 
must  have  been  written  earlier,  and  probably  very  much  earlier. 
Even  in  A.  D.  80,  it  would  perhaps  have  been  strange  that  the 
epistles  should  not  have  been  used. 

4.  PURPOSE 

The  proper  purpose  of  a  historian  is  to  tell  the  truth.  And 
Luke  was  a  genuine  historian.  His  own  account  of  his  method, 
Luke  1  :  1-4,  shows  that  he  knew  the  meaning  of  historical  research, 
and  the  character  of  his  books  bears  this  out.  Luke  did  not  permit 
any  desire  of  putting  Christianity  in  a  good  light,  or  of  defending 
one  kind  of  Christianity  against  another,  to  interfere  with  the  pri- 
mary duty  of  truthfulness. 


40  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

That  does  not  mean,  however,  that  the  book  of  The  Acts  is 
like  some  modern  university  dissertations — written  simply  and 
solely  in  order  to  say  some  new  thing,  whether  interesting  or  no. 
No  great  historian  goes  to  work  that  way,  Of  course  Luke  had  an 
interest  in  his  subject  matter.  Of  course  he  was  convinced  that 
Christianity  was  a  great  thing,  and  was  full  of  enthusiasm  in 
narrating  its  history.  In  that  he  was  perfectly  right.  Christianity 
really  was  a  great  thing.  The  best  celebration  of  its  greatness  was 
a  narration  of  the  facts.  Christian  faith  is  based  on  fact.  Luke 
wrote,  not  only  in  the  Gospel  but  also  in  The  Acts,  in  order  that  his 
readers  might  know  the  certainty  concerning  the  things  wherein 
they  were  instructed.     Luke  1  :  4. 

5.     LITERARY  CHARACTERISTICS 

The  author  of  The  Acts  was  well  acquainted  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. He  was  able  to  catch  the  spirit  of  the  primitive  Palestinian 
church.  His  books  exhibit  the  influence  of  the  Semitic  languages. 
But  he  was  also  capable  of  a  Greek  style  which  would  have  passed 
muster  in  the  schools  of  rhetoric.  Luke  1  :  1-4,  for  example,  is  a 
typical  Greek  sentence.  Evidently  Luke  could  move  with  ease  in 
the  larger  Greek  world  of  his  time.  His  references  to  political 
and  social  conditions  are  extraordinarily  exact.  His  narrative  is 
never  lacking  in  local  color.  He  knows  the  proper  titles  of  the  local 
officials,  and  the  peculiar  quality  of  the  local  superstitions.  His 
account  of  the  shipwreck  is  a  mine  of  information  about  the  sea- 
faring of  antiquity.  Evidently  he  was  a  keen  observer,  and  a  true 
traveler  of  a  cosmopolitan  age.  His  narrative  is  characterized  by 
a  certain  delightful  urbanity — an  urbanity,  however,  which  is 
deepened  and  ennobled  by  profound  convictions. 


In  the  Library. — Warfield,  "Acts,  Timothy,  Titus  and  Philemon," 
in  "The  Temple  Bible,"  pp.  i-xxvii.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible": 
Purves,  article  on  "Acts  of  the  Apostles."  Purves,  "Christianity  in 
the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp.  1-8.  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and 
Its  Writers,"  in  "The  Guild  Text  Books,"  pp.  41-46.  Hastings, 
"Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Headlam, article  on  "Acts  of  the  Apostles." 


LESSON  VIII 

THE  CROSS  AND  THE  RESURRECTION  THE  FOUNDATION 
OF  APOSTOLIC  PREACHING 


1.     THE  RESURRECTION  A  FACT  OF  HISTORY 

Which  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  contain  the  evidence 
for  the  resurrection  of  Jesus?  That  question  will  serve  to  begin 
the  teaching  of  the  lesson.  In  answer  to  it,  the  students  will 
probably  mention  the  four  Gospels.  To  the  Gospels,  however, 
should  be  added  especially  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

The  passage  in  First  Corinthians  is  deserving  of  very  careful 
attention.  For,  unlike  the  Gospels,  that  epistle  can  be  dated  to 
within  a  year  or  so.  It  was  written  only  about  twenty-five  years 
after  the  crucifixion.  Even  though  possibly  some  of  the  Gospels 
were  written  still  earlier,  the  precision  with  which  the  epistle  can 
be  dated  makes  its  witness  particularly  valuable.  Furthermore, 
the  author  of  the  epistle  is  well  known.  No  one  doubts  that 
First  Corinthians  was  written  by  Paul,  and  Paul  is  the  best-known 
man  of  apostolic  times.  Evidently  his  witness  to  the  facts  is  of 
the  utmost  value. 

Paul  himself  was  a  direct  witness  of  the  resurrection.  He  saw 
the  risen  Lord.  I  Cor.  9:1;  15  :  8.  In  I  Cor.  15  :  1-8,  however, 
he  does  not  content  himself  with  his  own  witness,  but  reproduces 
the  testimony  of  others  in  an  extended  list.  That  testimony  had 
come  to  Paul  by  ordinary  word  of  mouth.  "I  delivered  unto  you 
first  of  all,"  says  Paul,  "that  which  also  I  received."  In  what 
follows  there  is  a  list  of  the  appearances  of  the  risen  Christ.  "He 
appeared  to  Cephas;  then  to  the  twelve;  then  he  appeared  to 
above  five  hundred  brethren  at  once,  of  whom  the  greater  part 
remain  until  now,  but  some  are  fallen  asleep;  then  he  appeared  to 
James;  then  to  all  the  apostles;  and  last  of  all,  as  to  the  child 
untimely  born,  he  appeared  to  me  also."  Evidently  these  appear- 
ances are  not  conceived  of  merely  as  "visions,"  but  as  events  in  the 
external  world.  The  mention  of  the  burial,  v.  4,  is  a  plain  hint 
that  what  Peter  and  the  rest  saw  was  the  body  of  Jesus  raised 
from  the  tomb. 

41 


42  SENIOR  GRADED   LESSONS 

That  view  of  the  matter  is  amply  confirmed  in  the  Gospels  and 
in  the  book  of  The  Acts.  In  the  Gospels,  we  are  told  that  the  tomb 
was  found  empty  on  the  morning  of  the  third  day  after  the  cruci- 
fixion. It  was  found  empty  by  some  women  and  by  Peter  and  John. 
Since  the  tomb  was  empty,  the  body  which  appeared  to  the  dis- 
ciples had  some  connection  with  the  body  which  had  been  taken 
down  from  the  cross.  Furthermore,  the  Gospels  and  The  Acts 
make  the  bodily  character  of  the  appearances  abundantly  plain. 
Jesus  did  not  merely  appear  to  the  disciples  at  a  distance.  He 
walked  with  them  on  the  road  to  Emmaus.  He  broke  bread  with 
them.  He  came  into  the  very  midst  of  them  when  they  were 
assembled  in  a  room.  Thomas  could  even  touch  his  hands  and 
his  side.  These  are  merely  examples.  Clearly  the  testimony  of 
the  disciples  is  testimony  not  to  mere  spiritual  experiences,  but  to 
the  bodily  presence  of  the  Lord.  It  may  be  admitted  that  the  body 
was  a  glorified  body.  After  his  resurrection  Jesus  was  freed  from 
the  limitations  of  his  earthly  life.  Nevertheless,  he  was  not 
merely  a  "spirit."  Luke  24  :  39.  There  was  some  real,  though 
mysterious,  connection  between  the  glorified  body  and  the  body 
that  had  been  laid  in  the  tomb.  The  New  Testament  attests 
not  merely  the  immortality  of  Jesus,  but  his  resurrection. 

The  resurrection,  in  these  days,  is  hard  to  accept.  For  it  is  a 
miracle.  Against  any  miracle  there  is  a  tremendous  presumption. 
In  this  case,  however,  the  presumption  has  been  overcome.  It  has 
been  overcome  by  the  character  of  Jesus.  It  is  in  the  highest 
degree  unlikely  that  an  ordinary  man  should  rise  from  the  dead; 
but  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Jesus  should  have  risen.  The  resurrection 
is  unique.  But  so  is  the  life  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  The  two  wonders 
support  one  another.  Explain  away  the  testimony  to  the  resurrec- 
tion, and  your  task  is  not  done.  You  must  also  explain  away  that 
sinless  life.  If  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead  he  had  a  unique  experience. 
But  that  is  to  be  expected.  For  Jesus  himself  was  unlike  any  other 
of  the  children  of  men.  There  are  mysteries  in  his  life  that  have 
never  been  explained. 

The  resurrection  of  Jesus  is  a  well-attested  fact  of  history.  The 
proof  of  it  is  cumulative.  Any  one  of  the  proofs  might  be  regarded 
as  insufficient  when  taken  alone,  but  when  taken  together  they  are 
overpowering.  The  sinless,  unearthly  character  of  Jesus  separates 
him  from  the  rest  of  men,  so  that  probabilities  which  apply  to 
others  do  not  apply  to  him.  His  mysterious  self-consciousness 
involves  so  lofty  a  claim,  that  if  he  was  not  divine  he  was  a  megalo- 


THE  CROSS  AND  THE  RESURRECTION  43 

maniac — he  whose  calmness  and  strength  have  left  an  impression 
which  the  centuries  have  done  nothing  to  efface!  The  specific 
testimonies  to  the  empty  tomb  and  to  the  plain  bodily  appearances 
of  the  risen  Lord  are  independent  and  varied.  Finally,  unless  the 
resurrection  be  a  fact,  the  very  origin  of  the  Christian  Church 
becomes  an  insoluble  mystery.  The  resurrection  alone  can  explain 
the  sudden  transformation  of  a  company  of  weak,  discouraged  men 
into  the  conquerors  of  the  world. 

The  resurrection  of  Jesus  is  a  fact  of  history.  It  is  not  an 
aspiration  of  the  heart.  It  comes  ultimately  through  the  testimony 
of  the  senses.  The  apostles  came  forward  with  a  piece  of  plain 
information.  They  were  witnesses  to  a  fact  in  the  external  world. 
That  fact  has  put  a  new  face  upon  life.  It  is  good  news  of  salva- 
tion. 

2.     THE  RESURRECTION  CONFIRMED  BY  EXPERIENCE 

The  resurrection  is  a  fact  of  history.  Accept  it  as  true,  and 
you  can  have  hope  for  time  and  for  eternity.  At  this  point,  how- 
ever, some  men  experience  a  difficulty.  How  can  the  acceptance 
of  a  historical  fact  satisfy  the  longing  of  our  souls?  Must  we  stake 
our  salvation  upon  the  intricacies  of  historical  research?  Surely 
some  more  immediate  certitude  is  required. 

The  objection  would  be  valid  if  history  stood  alone.  But 
history  does  not  stand  alone.  It  has  suffered  from  a  false  isolation. 
A  Christian  certitude  that  is  founded  solely  upon  history  is  in- 
sufficient. History  is  necessary,  but  not  sufficient.  We  need 
history,  but  we  need  something  else  as  well. 

A  historical  conviction  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  is  not  the  end 
of  faith,  but  only  the  beginning.  If  faith  stops  there,  it  will  never 
stand  the  fires  of  criticism.  We  are  told  that  Jesus  lives.  So 
much  is  a  matter  of  testimony,  a  matter  of  history.  If  we  believe 
the  witness,  then  we  can  have  hope.  But  the  religious  problem 
of  our  lives  has  not  yet  been  solved.  Jesus  lives.  But  what  good  is 
it  to  us?  If  he  lives,  we  need  to  find  him.  We  need  to  find  him, 
and  we  can  find  him.  We  accept  the  message  of  the  resurrection 
enough  to  make  trial  of  it.  And  making  trial  of  it,  we  find  that  it 
is  true.  Jesus  is  found  to  be  alive,  for  he  makes  answer  to  our 
prayer,  and  heals  us.  We  never  could  have  come  to  him  unless 
we  had  accepted  the  historical  evidence  for  the  resurrection.  But 
starting  with  that  historical  belief  we  went  on  to  the  blessed  ex- 
perience of  salvation.     Christian   experience  cannot  do  without 


44  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

history.  But  it  adds  to  history  that  directness,  that  immediate- 
ness,  that  simplicity  of  conviction,  which  delivers  us  from  fear. 
We  began  with  history.  But  we  went  on  to  experience.  "Now 
we  believe,  not  because  of  thy  speaking:  for  we  have  heard  for 
ourselves,  and  know  that  this  is  indeed  the  Saviour  of  the  world." 

3.     THE  DEATH 

Jesus  is  alive.  If  we  find  him,  he  will  heal  us.  But  how  shall 
we  find  him?     In  the  New  Testament  we  receive  instruction. 

In  the  New  Testament  a  strange  fact  stares  us  in  the  face.  The 
New  Testament  seems  far  more  concerned  with  the  death  of  Jesus 
than  with  the  details  of  his  life.  Learned  men  have  tried  in  vain 
to  explain  that  curious  fact.  In  elaborate  treatises  they  have 
sought  the  explanation.  But  it  is  really  very  simple.  The  New 
Testament  emphasizes  the  death  of  Jesus  because  that  is  what 
Jesus  did  for  us — or  rather,  coming  after  his  perfect  obedience  to 
the  law,  it  is  the  culmination  of  what  he  did  for  us.  In  the  account 
of  Jesus'  life  we  are  told  what  Jesus  did  for  others.  That  account 
is  absolutely  necessary.  Without  it  we  should  never  have  been  in- 
terested in  Jesus  at  all.  But  it  is  to  us  a  means  to  an  end,  not  an 
end  in  itself.  We  read  in  the  Gospel  what  Jesus  did  for  others. 
For  one  he  placed  his  fingers  in  the  ears  and  said,  "Be  opened"; 
to  another  he  said,  "Arise,  take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk";  to  another, 
"Thy  sins  are  forgiven."  These  things  are  what  Jesus  did  for 
others.  But  what  has  he  done  for  us?  The  answer  of  the 
New  Testament  is  plain.  For  us  he  does  not  say,  "Arise  and 
walk."  For  us — he  died.  That  mysterious  thing  which  was 
wrought  on  Calvary — that  was  his  work  for  us.  The  cross  of 
Christ  is  a  mystery.  In  the  presence  of  it  theology  walks  after 
all  with  but  trembling,  halting  footsteps.  Learning  will  never 
unlock  its  meaning.  But  to  the  penitent  sinner,  though  mysterious, 
though  full  of  baffling  riddles,  it  is  plain  enough.  On  the  cross 
Jesus  dealt  with  our  sin.  Our  dreadful  guilt,  the  condemnation 
of  God's  law — it  is  wiped  out  by  an  act  of  grace.  It  seemed  in- 
separable from  us.  It  was  a  burden  no  earthly  friend  could  bear. 
But  Christ  is  Master  of  the  innermost  secrets  of  the  moral  world. 
He  has  accomplished  the  impossible,  he  has  borne  our  sins. 

By  the  cross  he  has  healed  us.  But  through  whom  does  he  apply 
the  healing  touch?  Through  no  one,  save  his  Spirit.  For  he  is 
here  himself.  If  we  are  seekers  for  him,  then  this  day  our  search 
is  over. 


THE  CROSS  AND  THE  RESURRECTION  45 

The  death  of  Christ,  in  the  modern  Church,  is  often  subordinated. 
Exclusive  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  holy  example  and  teaching 
of  the  Galilean  prophet.  The  modern  theologians  would  be  right  if 
there  were  no  such  thing  as  sin.  If  there  were  no  such  thing  as 
guilt,  and  if  there  were  no  such  thing  as  a  dreadful  enslaving  power 
of  evil,  then  a  noble  ideal  might  be  sufficient.  But  to  talk  about 
an  ideal  to  a  man  under  the  thralldom  of  sin  is  a  cruel  mockery. 

Sin  may  indeed  be  glossed  over.  Let  us  make  the  best  of  our 
condition,  we  are  told,  let  us  do  the  best  we  can,  let  us  simply 
trust  in  the  all-conquering  love  of  God.  Dangerous  advice!  By 
it  a  certain  superficial  joy  of  life  may  be  induced.  But  the  joy 
rests  upon  an  insecure  foundation.  It  is  dangerous  to  be  happy 
on  the  brink  of  the  abyss.  Permanent  joy  can  come  only  when 
sin  has  been  faced  honestly,  and  destroyed.  It  has  been  destroyed 
by  the  death  and  resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

It  is  true  that  God  is  loving.  He  has  manifested  his  love,  how- 
ever, better  than  by  complacency  toward  sin.  He  has  manifested 
it  by  the  gracious  gift  of  a  Saviour. 


In  the  Library. — Denney,  "The  Death  of  Christ."  Orr,  "The 
Resurrection  of  Jesus."  Crawford,  "The  Doctrine  of  Holy  Scripture 
Respecting  the  Atonement." 


LESSON  IX 
THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH 


The  author  of  The  Acts  has  given  a  wonderful  picture  of  the  early 
days  of  the  Christian  Church.  The  teacher  should  endeavor  to 
present  the  picture  before  the  mental  vision  of  the  class.  History 
should  not  be  studied  merely  as  a  dry  record  of  events.  The  events 
should  be  seen  as  well  as  understood.  They  can  be  seen  by  what 
is  called  the  historical  imagination.  The  term  ' 'imagination" 
often  contains  a  suggestion  of  unreality.  But  that  is  a  secondary 
use  of  the  word.  "Imagination"  means  "picturing."  You  can 
make  a  picture  of  what  really  happened  as  well  as  of  what  happened 
only  in  fiction.  The  historical  imagination  is  a  very  important 
faculty  in  the  student  of  the  New  Testament.  In  many  persons 
it  is  almost  wholly  lacking.     But  fortunately  it  may  be  acquired. 

In  the  lessons  that  follow,  great  stress  should  be  laid  upon  the 
simple  memorizing  of  the  course  of  events.  Advanced  study,  or 
topical  study,  is  useless  unless  it  is  based  upon  an  orderly  acquaint- 
ance with  the  contents  of  The  Acts.  History  comes  first — then 
the  interpretation  of  the  history. 

The  dominant  note  in  the  early  chapters  of  The  Acts  is  the  note 
of  joy.  After  the  three  dark  days  of  discouragement,  after  the 
quiet  period  of  waiting,  the  life  of  the  Church  suddenly  bursts 
forth  with  power.  Everything  is  fresh  and  new.  Difficulties  and 
dangers  have  not  yet  emerged.  Even  persecution  is  lacking.  The 
Church  enjoys  favor  with  the  people.  Thousands  are  converted 
in  a  day. 

1.  THE  GIFT  OF  TONGUES 

The  gift  of  tongues,  as  it  was  exercised  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
is  not  altogether  an  isolated  phenomenon.  It  appears  also  else- 
where in  The  Acts,  Acts  10  :  46;  19  :  6,  though  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  in  all  three  cases  it  assumed  exactly  the  same  form.  In 
the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  Paul  discusses  the  gift  at  con- 
siderable length.  I  Cor.,  ch.  14.  It  is  interesting  to  compare  that 
passage  with  the  passage  in  the  second  chapter  of  The  Acts. 

There  are  a  number  of  resemblances  between  the  two.  Both 
Paul  and  Luke  represent  the  gift  of  tongues  as  a  supernatural  thing, 

46 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH    47 

a  special  endowment  from  the  Spirit  of  God.  Both  Paul  and  Luke, 
furthermore,  represent  the  gift  as  an  ecstatic,  temporary  expression 
of  spiritual  exultation  rather  than  as  a  faculty  intended  to  be  prac- 
tically useful  in  the  work  of  the  Church.  On  the  other  hand,  there 
are  such  marked  differences  between  the  two  accounts  as  to  make 
it  evident  that  the  gift  as  it  was  manifested  at  Pentecost  was  very 
considerably  different  from  that  which  was  exercised  in  the  church 
at  Corinth. 

The  speaking  with  tongues  as  Paul  describes  it  was  a  kind  of 
ejaculation,  expressive  of  the  religious  life  of  the  speaker,  but  in- 
comprehensible to  others.  In  order,  therefore,  to  make  the  gift 
edifying  to  the  congregation  at  large  there  had  to  be  some  one  else 
present  who  was  in  possession  of  another  gift,  the  gift  of  interpre- 
tation. The  speaking  with  tongues  at  Pentecost,  however,  was  a 
miraculous  use  of  various  languages.  Some  have  supposed  that 
Luke  is  describing  rather  a  new  language,  which  possessed  the 
supernatural  quality  of  being  understood  by  men  of  various  na- 
tionalities. The  most  natural  interpretation  of  the  passage,  how- 
ever, is  that  which  has  just  been  suggested.  The  disciples,  filled 
with  the  Spirit,  spoke  some  in  one  language  and  some  in  another, 
or  perhaps  the  same  individuals  used  different  languages  at  succes- 
sive moments.  The  outsiders  received  various  impressions  of  the 
strange  phenomenon.  Some,  mocking,  declared  that  the  disciples 
were  drunk.  These,  we  may  suppose,  were  men  who  came  into 
contact  with  those  disciples  who  were  speaking  some  language 
known  only  to  another  group  among  the  hearers.  The  general 
impression  seems  to  have  been  wonder  at  the  miraculous  gift.  The 
gift  of  tongues  provided  an  opportunity  for  the  first  Christian 
preaching.  In  just  this  form  it  was  perhaps  never  repeated.  It 
was  a  unique  gift  provided  for  an  absolutely  unique  occasion. 

2.  THE  SPEECHES 

Ancient  historians  often  put  imaginary  speeches  into  the  mouths 
of  their  characters.  The  speeches  were  intended  to  represent 
not  what  was  actually  said  but  what  might  have  been  said  under 
the  circumstances.  This  procedure  of  the  historians  was  not 
intended  to  deceive  the  readers.  It  was  merely  a  literary  form,  a 
method  of  vivid  description. 

Luke,  however,  seems  not  to  have  allowed  himself  even  the  license 
which  was  regarded  as  allowable  by  the  best  historians  of  antiquity. 
The  speeches  in  The  Acts  are  apparently  either  verbatim  reports 


48  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

of  what  was  actually  said,  or  else  summaries  based  upon  trust- 
worthy tradition.  If  they  had  been  composed  freely  by  the  his- 
torian himself  their  characteristic  differences  and  their  perfect 
adaptation  to  different  occasions  would  be  difficult  to  explain. 

The  speeches  of  Peter  and  of  the  earliest  disciples,  in  particular, 
are  very  different  from  those  of  Paul.  They  contain  a  number  of 
features  which  occur  either  not  at  all  or  only  rarely  in  the  rest  of 
the  New  Testament.  The  designation  of  Jesus  as  "the  Servant," 
for  example,  a  designation  taken  from  the  latter  part  of  Isaiah, 
is  characteristic  of  these  speeches.  Another  characteristic  designa- 
tion of  Jesus  is  "Prince"  or  "Prince  of  life."  Acts  3  :  15;  5  :  31. 
In  general,  the  representation  of  Jesus  in  the  early  chapters  of 
The  Acts  is  just  what  might  have  been  expected  under  the  circum- 
stances. At  the  beginning  of  the  Church's  life,  everything  is 
simple  and  easy  of  comprehension  even  by  outsiders.  The  apostles 
represented  Jesus  first  as  a  man  approved  of  God  by  the  miracles 
which  he  had  wrought.  To  have  delivered  up  such  a  man  to  death 
was  itself  a  grievous  sin.  But  that  was  not  all.  This  Jesus  who 
was  crucified  had  been  raised  from  the  dead;  and  both  in  his  death 
and  in  his  resurrection  he  had  fulfilled  the  Messianic  predictions 
of  the  ancient  prophets.  He  was  then  nothing  less  than  the  Christ. 
Now,  too,  his  period  of  humiliation  was  over.  He  had  been  given 
the  full  powers  of  Lordship.  From  him  had  come  the  wonder- 
working Spirit.  It  will  be  observed  that  these  speeches,  though 
they  begin  with  what  is  simplest  and  easiest  of  acceptance  by  an 
outsider,  really  contain,  at  least  in  germ,  the  full  doctrine  of  the 
divine  Christ. 

3.  THE  CONVERTS 

The  body  of  disciples  who  were  assembled  before  the  day  of 
Pentecost  consisted  of  only  about  one  hundred  and  twenty  persons. 
Acts  1  :  15.  After  the  notable  sermon  of  Peter,  which  was  spoken 
in  explanation  of  the  gift  of  tongues,  three  thousand  were  converted. 
A  little  later  the  Church  possessed  five  thousand  men.     Acts  4  :  4. 

The  outward  sign  of  conversion  was  baptism.  "Repent  ye," 
said  Peter,  "and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  unto  the  remission  of  your  sins;  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Baptism  was  not  altogether  new.  It  had 
been  practiced  not  only  among  converts  to  Judaism,  but  especially 
by  John  the  Baptist.  Christian  baptism,  however,  is  sharply  dis- 
tinguished from  the  baptism  of  John.  Mark  1  :  7,  8;  Acts  18  :  25; 
19  :  1-6.     Both    were    expressive    of    repentance.     But    Christian 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH    49 

baptism  was  connected  specifically  with  Jesus,  and  also  with  the 
bestowal  of  the  Spirit. 

Baptism  was  "in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,"  or  "into  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Jesus."  It  was  the  sacrament  by  which  the  convert 
signified  his  cleansing  from  sin  and  his  entrance  into  that  peculiarly 
close  relation  to  Christ  which  is  of  the  essence  of  Christian  expe- 
rience. In  itself,  of  course,  the  rite  of  baptism  is  useless.  But 
when  accompanied  by  faith  it  is  a  means  of  real  blessing.  Bap- 
tism, like  the  other  Christian  sacrament,  the  Lord's  Supper,  was 
instituted  by  Christ  himself.  Matt.  28  :  19.  In  The  Acts  the 
full  trinitarian  formula  of  baptism  is  not  given.  "In  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ"  is  sufficient  to  designate  the  sacrament. 

4.  JOY  AND  FEAR 

The  mysterious  power  that  was  working  among  the  disciples 
was  beneficent.  It  accomplished  miracles  of  healing.  As  in  the 
case  of  Jesus  himself  so  now  among  his  disciples  the  Spirit  of  God 
was  manifested  in  the  expulsion  of  demons.  Matt.  12  :  28;  Acts 
5  :  16.     The  Spirit  was  manifested  also  in  the  healing  of  disease. 

One  cure,  in  particular,  is  narrated  with  a  wealth  of  vivid  detail. 
The  healing  of  the  lame  man  led  to  the  opposition  of  the  Sanhedrin. 
It  led  also  to  favor  among  the  people.  All  the  people  ran  together 
in  Solomon's  porch  greatly  wondering.  Acts  3  :  11.  Peter  and 
John  took  no  credit  for  what  they  had  done.  They  attributed 
the  miracle  solely  to  the  power  of  Jesus.  It  was  the  same  Jesus 
against  whom  the  crowd  had  shouted,  "Crucify  him,  crucify  him," 
only  a  few  weeks  before.  Surely  a  reason  for  remorse  rather  than 
joy!  But  God  is  gracious.  Through  Jesus,  the  crucified  One, 
salvation  was  offered  even  to  the  murderers.  Repentance  was 
followed  by  rejoicing.  The  envy  of  the  Sanhedrin  was  held  in 
check.     A  notable  miracle  had  been  wrought. 

That  miracle  was  not  isolated.  Many  signs  and  wonders  were 
wrought  by  the  hands  of  the  apostles.  The  people  even  "carried 
out  the  sick  into  the  streets,  and  laid  them  on  beds  and  couches, 
that,  as  Peter  came  by,  at  the  least  his  shadow  might  overshadow 
some  one  of  them."  Acts  5  :  12-15.  Perhaps  we  are  to  understand 
that  that  method  of  seeking  cure  was  actually  successful.  Cer- 
tainly it  was  an  unusual  method.  But  God  adopts  unusual  methods 
at  unusual  times.     He  adapts  his  mercy  to  the  needs  of  men. 

The  general  impression  left  by  the  early  chapters  of  The  Acts 
is  an  impression  of  light  and  gladness.  There  is  opposition,  but 
Sen.  t.  m.  1. 


50  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

it  is  powerless  against  triumphant  joy.  One  incident,  however,  in- 
troduces a  discordant  note.  It  is  the  incident  of  Ananias  and 
Sapphira. 

The  early  Church  was  animated  by  a  spirit  of  self-sacrifice. 
Many  of  the  disciples  sold  their  possessions  and  devoted  the  price 
to  the  common  good.  One  of  those  who  did  so  was  Joseph  Barnabas, 
who  was  to  be  prominent  in  the  subsequent  history. 

A  certain  man,  Ananias,  however,  and  Sapphira  his  wife,  after 
they  had  sold  their  possession  kept  back  part  of  the  price.  In 
itself  that  was  not  necessarily  wrong.  Their  sin  was  the  sin  of 
deception.  They  pretended  to  have  given  all,  though  they  had 
really  given  only  a  part.  A  more  destructive  sin  could  scarcely 
have  been  imagined.  They  had  lied  unto  the  Holy  Spirit.  Such 
conduct  would  bring  contempt  upon  the  Church.  Ananias  and 
Sapphira  discovered  that  God  cannot  be  trifled  with.  And  the 
judgment  wrought  upon  them  inspired  fear  in  all  who  heard. 

It  is  well  that  this  incident  has  been  recorded.  It  prevents  a 
one-sided  impression  of  the  Church's  life.  The  power  that  animated 
the  Church  was  beneficent.  But  it  was  also  terrible  and  mysterious 
and  holy.  In  the  presence  of  it  there  was  joy.  But  that  joy  was 
akin  to  fear.  "It  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
living  God."  The  lesson  is  of  permanent  value.  The  Spirit  of 
God  must  be  received  with  joy.  But  not  with  a  common  joy. 
Not  with  the  joy  of  familiarity.  But  rather  with  the  wondering, 
trembling  joy  of  adoration. 

In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  21-46.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on  "Weeks, 
Feast  of"  and  "Temple."  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools": 
Lumby,  "The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  1880,  pp.  1-61.  "The  Bible 
Commentary,"  vol.  ii:  Cook,  "The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  pp.  351-386. 
Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol. 
ii:  Plumptre,  "The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  pp.  1-28.  Rackham,  "The 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  pp.  1-69.  These  commentaries  will  be  designated 
hereafter  by  the  names  of  the  authors  only. 


LESSON  X 
THE  FIRST  PERSECUTION 


The  persecution  which  arose  in  connection  with  Stephen  marks 
a  turning  point  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  Up  to  that  time,  the 
disciples  had  been  content,  for  the  most  part,  with  laboring  in 
Jerusalem.  Now  they  were  forced  out  into  a  broader  field.  One 
result  of  the  persecution  was  the  geographical  extension  of  the 
Church. 

Another  result  was  perhaps  even  more  important.  The  extension 
caused  by  persecution  was  not  merely  geographical;  it  was  also, 
perhaps,  intellectual  and  spiritual.  The  Church  was  really  from 
the  beginning  in  possession  of  a  new  religious  principle,  but  at  first 
that  principle  was  not  fully  understood.  Persecution  probably 
helped  to  reveal  the  hidden  riches.  The  Pharisees  were  keener 
than  the  disciples  themselves.  Hostility  sharpened  the  vision. 
The  disciples  themselves  were  still  content  to  share  in  the  estab- 
lished forms  of  Jewish  worship;  but  the  Pharisees  saw  that  they 
were  really  advocates  of  a  new  principle.  Christianity,  unless  it 
were  checked,  would  supersede  Judaism.  The  Pharisees  were 
right.     Jealous  fear  detected  what  ancestral  piety  had  concealed. 

The  hostility  of  the  Jews  perhaps  helped  to  open  the  eyes  of  the 
Church.  No  doubt,  a  development  was  already  at  work.  Perse- 
cution was  the  result  as  well  as  the  cause  of  the  new  freedom. 
Stephen  was  persecuted  possibly  just  because  his  preaching  went 
beyond  that  of  Peter.  With  or  without  persecution,  the  Church 
would  have  transcended  the  bounds  of  the  older  Judaism.  It 
contained  a  germ  of  new  life  which  was  certain  to  bear  fruit.  But 
persecution  hastened  the  process.  It  scattered  the  Church  abroad, 
and  it  revealed  the  revolutionary  character  of  the  Church's  life. 

With  the  coming  of  Jesus  a  new  era  had  begun.  Judaism  had 
before  been  separate  from  the  Gentile  world.  That  separation 
had  been  due  not  to  racial  prejudice,  but  to  a  divine  ordinance. 
It  had  served  a  useful  purpose.  Jewish  particularism  should  never 
be  despised;  it  should  be  treated  with  piety  and  gratitude.  It 
had  preserved  the  precious  deposit  of  truth  in  the  midst  of  heathen- 
ism.    But  its  function,  though  useful,  was  temporary.     It  was  a 


$2  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

preparation  for  Christ.  Before  Christ  it  was  a  help;  after  Christ 
it  became  a  hindrance. 

Persecution  was  not  the  beginning  of  the  new  freedom.  Free- 
dom was  based  upon  the  words  of  Jesus.  It  had  become  plainer 
again,  perhaps,  in  the  teaching  of  Stephen.  Furthermore,  if  free- 
dom was  not  begun  by  the  persecution,  it  was  also  not  completed 
by  it.  The  emancipation  of  the  Church  from  Judaism  was  a  slow 
process.  The  unfolding  of  that  process  is  narrated  in  The  Acts. 
Even  after  the  Church  was  scattered  abroad  through  Judea  and 
Samaria,  much  remained  to  be  done.  Cornelius,  Antioch,  Paul 
were  still  in  the  future.  Nevertheless,  the  death  of  Stephen  was 
an  important  event.  It  was  by  no  means  the  whole  of  the  process; 
but  it  marks  an  epoch. 

The  gradual  rise  of  persecution  should  be  traced  in  class — first 
the  fruitless  arrest  of  Peter  and  John  and  their  bold  defiance; 
then  the  arrest  of  the  apostles,  the  miraculous  escape,  the  preaching 
in  the  temple,  the  re-arrest,  the  counsel  of  Gamaliel,  the  scourging; 
then  the  preaching  of  Stephen  and  the  hostility  of  the  Pharisees. 
The  opposition  of  the  Sadducees  was  comparatively  without  sig- 
nificance. The  Sadducees  were  not  Jews  at  heart.  They  might 
persecute  the  Church  just  because  the  Church  was  patriotically 
Jewish.  But  the  Pharisees  were  really  representative  of  the 
existing  Judaism.  Pharisaic  persecution  meant  the  hostility  of  the 
nation.  And  it  implied  the  independence  of  the  Church.  If  the 
disciples  were  nothing  but  Jews,  why  did  the  Jews  persecute  them? 

In  what  follows,  a  few  details  will  be  discussed. 

1.  THEUDAS  AND  JUDAS 

Judas  the  Galilean,  mentioned  by  Gamaliel,  Acts  5  :  37,  appears 
also  in  Josephus.  His  insurrection  occurred  at  the  time  of  the 
great  enrollment  under  Quirinius,  the  Syrian  legate.  This  enroll- 
ment was  different  from  that  which  brought  Joseph  and  Mary  to 
Bethlehem  at  the  time  of  the  birth  of  Jesus.  Luke  2  :  2-5.  That 
former  enrollment  occurred  before  the  death  of  Herod  the  Great 
in  4  B.  C.  Luke  1:5;  Matt.  2  :  1.  The  enrollment  to  which 
Gamaliel  referred  was  carried  out  after  the  deposition  of  Archelaus 
in  A.  D.  6. 

With  regard  to  Judas  all  is  clear.  But  Theudas  is  known  only 
from  Acts  5  :  36.  The  Theudas  who  is  mentioned  in  Josephus 
is  different,  for  his  insurrection  did  not  occur  till  about  A.  D.  44, 
after  the  time  of  Gamaliel's  speech.     Gamaliel  was  referring  to 


THE  FIRST  PERSECUTION  53 

some  insurrection  of  an  earlier  period.     The  name  Theudas  was 
common,  and  so  were  tumults  and  insurrections. 

2.  THE  SEVEN 

It  has  been  questioned  whether  the  seven  men  who  were  appointed 
to  assist  the  apostles  were  "deacons."  The  title  is  not  applied 
to  them.  The  narrative  does,  indeed,  imply  that  they  were  to 
"serve  tables,"  Acts  6  :  2,  and  the  Greek  word  here  translated 
"serve"  is  the  verb  from  which  the  Greek  noun  meaning  "deacon" 
is  derived;  but  the  same  word  is  also  used  for  the  "ministry  [or 
service]  of  the  word"  in  which  the  apostles  were  to  continue.  V.  4. 
The  special  technical  use  of  the  word  "deacon"  appears  in  the  New 
Testament  only  in  Phil.  1  :  1 ;  I  Tim.  3  :  8,  12.  Compare  Rom.  16  : 1. 

Nevertheless,  though  the  word  itself  does  not  occur  in  our  passage, 
it  is  perhaps  not  incorrect  to  say  that  the  seven  were  "deacons." 
Their  functions  were  practically  those  of  the  diaconate;  their 
appointment,  at  any  rate,  shows  that  the  apostles  recognized  the 
need  of  some  such  office  in  the  Church.  It  is  not  quite  clear  what 
is  meant  by  the  expression,  to  "serve  tables."  The  reference  is 
either  to  tables  for  food,  or  else  to  the  money  tables  of  a  banker. 
If  the  former  interpretation  be  correct,  then  the  deacons  were  to 
attend  especially  to  the  management  of  the  common  meals.  Even 
then,  however,  the  expression  probably  refers  indirectly  to  the 
general  administration  of  charity,  a  prominent  part  of  the  service 
being  mentioned  simply  as  typical  of  the  whole. 

3.  THE  SYNAGOGUES 

The  Greek  word  translated  "Libertines"  in  Acts  6  :  9  comes  from 
the  Latin  word  for  "freedmen."  The  freedmen  here  mentioned 
were  probably  descendants  of  Jews  taken  by  Pompey  as  slaves  to 
Rome.  The  Jewish  opponents  of  Stephen  therefore  included  Romans, 
men  of  eastern  and  middle  north  Africa,  and  men  of  eastern  and 
western  Asia  Minor.  These  foreign  Jews,  when  they  settled  in 
Jerusalem,  had  their  own  synagogues.  It  is  doubtful  how  many 
synagogues  are  mentioned  in  our  passage.  Luke  may  mean  that 
each  of  the  five  groups  had  a  separate  synagogue,  or  he  may  be 
grouping  the  men  of  Cilicia  and  Asia  in  one  synagogue.  The  word- 
ing of  the  Greek  perhaps  rather  favors  the  view  that  only  two  syna- 
gogues are  mentioned — one  consisting  of  Libertines  and  men  of 
Cyrene  and  Alexandria,  and  the  other  consisting  of  Cilicians  and 
Asians. 


54  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

4.  THE  SPEECH  OF  STEPHEN 

In  defending  himself,  Stephen  gave  a  summary  of  Hebrew 
history.  At  first  sight,  that  summary  might  seem  to  have  little 
bearing  upon  the  specific  charges  that  had  been  made.  But  the 
history  which  Stephen  recited  was  a  history  of  Israel.  "You  are 
destroying  the  divine  privileges  of  Israel" — that  was  the  charge. 
"No,"  said  Stephen,  "history  shows  that  the  true  privileges  of 
Israel  are  the  promises  of  divine  deliverance.  To  them  law  and 
temple  are  subordinate.  From  Abraham  on  there  was  a  promise 
of  deliverance  from  Egypt.  After  that  deliverance  another 
deliverance  was  promised.  It  is  the  one  which  was  wrought  by 
Jesus.  Moses,  God's  instrument  in  the  first  deliverance,  was 
rejected  by  his  contemporaries.  Jesus,  the  greater  Deliverer, 
was  rejected  by  you.  We  disciples  of  Jesus  are  the  true  Israelites, 
for  we,  unlike  you,  honor  the  promises  of  God." 

Other  interpretations  of  the  speech  have  been  proposed.  For 
example,  some  find  the  main  thought  of  the  speech  to  be  this: 
"The  wanderings  of  the  patriarchs  and  the  long  period  of  time  which 
elapsed  before  the  building  of  the  temple  show  that  true  and 
acceptable  worship  of  God  is  not  limited  to  any  particular  place." 
At  any  rate,  the  speech  requires  study — and  repays  it. 

What  was  said  in  the  last  lesson  about  the  speeches  of  The  Acts 
in  general  applies  fully  to  the  speech  of  Stephen.  The  very  diffi- 
culties of  the  speech,  as  well  as  its  other  peculiarities,  help  to  show 
that  it  represents  a  genuine  tradition  of  what,  in  a  unique  situation, 
was  actually  said. 

5.  MARTYRDOM 

The  word  "martyr"  is  simply  the  Greek  word  for  "witness." 
That  is  the  word  which  is  translated  "witness"  in  Acts  1  :  8. 
"Ye  shall  receive  power,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  come  upon  you: 
and  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses  both  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all  Judaea 
and  Samaria,  and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth."  There, 
of  course,  there  is  no  special  reference  to  dying  for  the  sake  of 
Christ.  It  is  primarily  the  ordinary  verbal  testimony  which  is 
meant.  The  special  meaning  "martyr"  is  not  often  attached  to  the 
Greek  word  in  the  New  Testament.  Probably  even  in  Acts  22  :  20, 
where  the  word  is  applied  to  Stephen,  it  is  to  be  translated  "witness" 
rather  than  "martyr." 

Martyrdom,  then,  is  only  one  kind  of  witnessing.  But  it  is  a 
very  important  kind.  Men  will  not  die  for  what  they  do  not 
believe.     When  Stephen  sank  beneath  the  stones  of  his  enemies 


THE  FIRST  PERSECUTION  55 

he  was  preaching  a  powerful  sermon.  The  very  fact  of  his  death 
was  a  witness  to  Christ.  The  manner  of  it  was  still  more  significant. 
Stephen,  crying  in  the  hour  of  death,  "Lord  Jesus,  receive  my 
spirit,"  Stephen  dying  with  words  of  forgiveness  on  his  lips,  "Lord, 
lay  not  this  sin  to  their  charge,"  was  a  witness  indeed. 

The  Church  can  never  do  without  that  kind  of  witnessing. 
True,  it  may  not  now  often  appear  as  actual  martyrdom.  But 
bravery  is  needed  as  much  as  ever — bravery  in  business,  men  who 
will  not  say,  "Business  is  business,"  but  will  do  what  is  right  even 
in  the  face  of  failure;  bravery  in  politics,  men  to  whom  righteousness 
is  more  than  a  pose;  bravery  in  social  life,  men  and  women  who  will 
sacrifice  convention  every  time  to  principle,  who,  for  example, 
will  maintain  the  Christian  Sabbath  in  the  face  of  ridicule.  Modern 
life  affords  plenty  of  opportunities  for  cowardice,  plenty  of  oppor- 
tunities for  denying  the  faith  through  fear  of  men.  It  also  affords 
opportunities  for  bravery.  You  can  still  show  whether  you  are  of 
the  stuff  that  Stephen  was  made  of — above  all,  you  can  show 
whether  you  are  possessed  by  the  same  Spirit  and  are  a  servant  of 
the  same  Lord. 

6.  THE  RESULT  OF  THE  PERSECUTION 

The  persecution  resulted  only  in  the  spread  of  the  gospel. 
Gamaliel  was  right.  It  was  useless  to  fight  against  God.  The 
disciples  were  in  possession  of  an  invincible  power,  and  they  knew 
it  from  the  very  beginning.  When  Peter  and  John  returned  from 
their  first  arrest,  the  disciples  responded  in  a  noble  prayer.  Acts 
4  :  24-30.  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  with  the  Gentiles  and  the 
peoples  of  Israel,  gathered  together  against  Jesus,  had  accomplished 
only  what  God's  hand  and  God's  counsel  foreordained  to  come  to 
pass.  So  it  would  be  also  with  the  enemies  of  the  Church.  When 
the  disciples  had  prayed,  "the  place  was  shaken  wherein  they  were 
gathered  together;  and  they  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  they  spake  the  word  of  God  with  boldness."  The  answer  to 
that  prayer  was  prophetic  of  the  whole  history  of  the  Church. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  40-42,  47-55.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible" :  articles  on  "Gama- 
liel," "Theudas,"  "Judas"  (6),  "Deacon";  Purves,  article  on  "Stephen." 
Ramsay,  "Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  44-65.  Rackham, 
pp.  69-1 1 1.  Lumby,  pp.  61-97.  Plumptre,  pp.  28-47.  Cook,  pp. 
386-406. 


LESSON  XI 

THE  FIRST  GENTILE  CONVERTS 


This  lesson  treats  of  a  number  of  steps  in  the  extension  of  the 
gospel.  The  beginning  is  the  purely  Jewish  Church  that  is  de- 
scribed in  the  first  chapters  of  The  Acts;  the  goal  is  the  Gentile 
Christianity  of  Paul.  Gentile  Christianity  was  not  produced  all 
at  once.  The  extension  of  the  gospel  to  Gentiles  was  a  gradual 
process.  The  present  lesson  is  concerned  only  with  the  early 
stages.  The  teacher  should  present  the  lesson  in  such  a  way  as 
to  emphasize  the  main  feature  of  the  narrative.  The  main  feature 
is  the  central  place  assigned  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  Though  the 
extension  of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles  was  a  process,  that  process 
was  due  not  to  mere  natural  development,  but  to  the  gracious 
leading  of  God. 

As  was  observed  in  Lesson  X,  Stephen  perhaps  introduced  into 
the  Church  a  more  independent  attitude  toward  the  existing 
Judaism.  There  is  no  reason,  indeed,  to  suppose  that  he  thought 
either  of  preaching  to  Gentiles  or  of  forsaking  the  ceremonial  law. 
But  possibly  he  did  venture  to  exhibit  the  temporary  and  pro- 
visional character  of  the  temple  worship  as  compared  with  the 
promises  of  God.  Indirectly,  therefore,  though  certainly  not 
directly,  Stephen  opened  the  way  for  the  Gentile  mission. 

The  persecution  was  another  step  in  the  process.  It  scattered 
the  Jews  abroad  into  regions  where  Gentiles  were  more  numerous 
than  in  Jerusalem,  and  served  perhaps  also  to  reveal  to  the  Church 
itself  its  incompatibility  with  Pharisaic  Judaism. 

The  evangelization  of  Samaria  was  another  important  step. 
Though  the  Samaritans  were  only  half  Gentiles,  they  were  par- 
ticularly detested  by  the  Jews.  In  preaching  to  them,  the  dis- 
ciples were  overcoming  Jewish  scruples,  and  thus  were  moving 
in  the  direction  of  a  real  Gentile  mission.  The  baptizing  of  the 
Ethiopian  may  have  been  another  step  in  the  process. 

The  most  important  event,  however,  was  the  conversion  of  Cor- 
nelius and  his  household.  Here  the  issue  was  clearly  raised.  Corne- 
lius did  not,  like  the  Ethiopian,  depart  at  once  after  baptism  to  a 

56 


THE  FIRST  GENTILE  CONVERTS  57 

distant  home.  His  reception  into  the  Church  was  a  matter  of 
public  knowledge. 

Luke  was  well  aware  of  the  importance  of  the  story  about 
Cornelius.  That  appears  from  the  minuteness  with  which  the 
story  is  narrated.  After  it  has  been  completed  once,  it  is  repeated, 
at  very  considerable  length,  as  a  part  of  Peter's  defense  at  Jeru- 
salem. The  effect  is  as  though  this  incident  were  heavily  under- 
scored. 

The  importance  of  the  Cornelius  incident  appears  also  in  the 
fact  that  it  gave  rise  to  criticism.  Apparently  this  was  the  first 
serious  criticism  which  the  gradually  widening  mission  had  en- 
countered within  the  Church.  There  is  no  suggestion  of  such 
criticism  in  the  case  of  the  preaching  in  Samaria.  But  now  a 
much  more  radical  step  had  been  taken.  Peter  had  eaten  with 
uncircumcised  men.  Acts  11:3.  A  more  serious  violation  of 
Jewish  particularism  could  hardly  have  been  imagined. 

In  defense,  Peter  appealed  simply  to  the  manifest  authorization 
which  he  had  received  from  God.  That  authorization  had  appeared 
first  of  all  in  the  visions  which  Peter  and  Cornelius  had  received, 
with  other  direct  manifestations  of  the  divine  will,  and  also  more 
particularly  in  the  bestowal  of  the  Spirit.  If  the  Spirit  was  given 
to  uncircumcised  Gentiles,  then  circumcision  was  no  longer  necessary 
to  membership  in  the  Church.  In  the  narrative  about  Cornelius, 
there  is  a  remarkable  heaping  up  of  supernatural  guidance.  Vision 
is  added  to  vision,  revelation  to  revelation.  The  reason  is  plain. 
A  decisive  step  was  being  taken.  If  taken  by  human  initiative, 
it  was  open  to  criticism.  The  separateness  of  Israel  from  other 
nations  was  a  divine  ordinance.  Since  it  had  been  instituted  by 
God,  it  could  be  abrogated  only  by  him.  True,  Jesus  had  said, 
"Make  disciples  of  all  the  nations."  Matt.  28  :  19.  But  the  how 
and  the  when  had  been  left  undecided.  Were  the  Gentiles  to 
become  Jews  in  order  to  become  Christians,  and  was  the  Gentile 
mission  to  begin  at  once?  Those  were  grave  questions.  .  They 
could  not  be  decided  without  divine  guidance.  That  guidance 
was  given  in  the  case  of  Cornelius. 

Peter's  defense  was  readily  accepted.  "And  when  they  heard 
these  things,  they  held  their  peace,  and  glorified  God,  saying, 
Then  to  the  Gentiles  also  hath  God  granted  repentance  unto  life." 
The  active  opposition  to  the  Gentile  mission  did  not  arise  until 
later.  But  how  could  that  opposition  arise  at  all?  Since  God 
had  spoken  so  clearly,  who  could  deny  to  the  Gentiles  a  free 


58  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

entrance  into  the  Church?  After  the  case  of  Cornelius,  how  could 
any  possible  question  arise? 

As  a  matter  of  fact — though  it  may  seem  strange — the  ac- 
ceptance of  Cornelius  did  not  at  first  determine  the  policy  of  the 
Church.  That  incident  remained,  indeed,  stored  up  in  memory. 
It  was  appealed  to  years  afterwards  by  Peter  himself,  in  order  to 
support  the  Gentile  Christianity  of  Paul.  Acts  15  :  7-9,  14. 
But  so  far  as  the  practice  of  the  Jewish  Church  was  concerned, 
the  Cornelius  incident  seems  to  have  remained  for  a  time  without 
effect.  The  bestowal  of  the  Spirit  upon  Cornelius  and  his  friends 
was  regarded,  apparently,  as  a  special  dispensation  which  fixed 
no  precedent.  Before  engaging  in  further  preaching  to  Gentiles, 
the  Church  was  waiting,  perhaps,  for  manifestations  of  the  divine 
will  as  palpable  as  those  which  had  been  given  to  Peter  and  to 
Cornelius. 

This  attitude  is  rather  suprising.  It  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  for  the  present  the  Church  was  fully  engrossed  in 
work  for  Jews.  Undoubtedly,  a  Gentile  work  was  to  come,  and 
the  Cornelius  incident,  as  well  as  what  Jesus  had  said,  was  regarded 
as  prophetic  of  it,  Acts  11  :  18;  but  the  time  and  the  manner  of  its 
institution  were  still  undetermined.  Were  the  Gentile  converts 
generally — whatever  might  be  the  special  dispensation  for  Cor- 
nelius— to  be  required  to  submit  to  circumcision  and  become  mem- 
bers of  the  chosen  people?  This  and  other  questions  had  not  yet 
even  been  faced.  Engrossed  for  the  present  in  the  Jewish  mission, 
the  Church  could  leave  these  questions  to  the  future  guidance 
of  God. 

In  what  follows,  a  number  of  special  points  will  be  briefly 
discussed. 

1.  PHILIP 

After  the  baptism  of  the  Ethiopian,  "the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
caught  away  Philip;  and  the  eunuch  saw  him  no  more,  for  he  went 
on  his  way  rejoicing.  But  Philip  was  found  at  Azotus:  and  passing 
through  he  preached  the  gospel  to  all  the  cities,  till  he  came  to 
Caesarea."  The  meaning  of  these  words  is  not  perfectly  plain. 
Are  we  to  understand  that  Philip  was  carried  away  to  Azotus  by  a 
miracle,  or  is  nothing  more  intended  than  a  sudden  departure 
under  the  impulsion  of  the  Spirit?  The  latter  interpretation  is 
not  at  all  impossible.  What  has  been  emphazised  in  the  whole 
narrative  is   the  strangeness,    the   unaccountableness  of   Philip's 


THE  FIRST  GENTILE  CONVERTS  59 

movements.  This  appears  particularly  in  the  sudden  separation 
from  the  eunuch.  The  eunuch  expected  further  conference  with 
Philip  but  suddenly  Philip  rushed  off,  as  though  snatched  away 
by  a  higher  power.  All  through  this  incident,  there  is  something 
strangely  sudden  and  unexpected  about  Philip's  movements. 
Human  deliberation  evidently  had  no  part  in  his  actions.  He  was 
under  the  immediate  impulsion  of  the  Spirit. 

The  narrative  leaves  Philip  at  Caesarea,  and  there  he  appears 
years  afterwards,  at  the  time  of  Paul's  last  journey  to  Jerusalem. 
Acts  21  :  8,  9.  Luke  was  at  that  time  one  of  the  company,  and 
may  have  received  directly  from  Philip  the  materials  for  the  narra- 
tive in  the  eighth  chapter  of  The  Acts.  Philip  appears  in  Christian 
tradition,  but  there  is  some  confusion  between  Philip  the  evangelist 
and  Philip  the  apostle. 

2.  SIMON  MAGUS 

Simon  the  sorcerer,  or  "Simon  Magus,"  is  an  interesting  figure. 
He  has  laid  hold  of  the  fancy  of  Christendom.  From  his  name — 
with  reference  to  Acts  8  :  18,  19 — the  word  "simony"  has  been 
coined  to  designate  the  sin  of  buying  or  selling  any  sort  of  spiritual 
advantage.  Simon  is  very  prominent  in  Christian  tradition, 
where  he  is  regarded  as  the  fountainhead  of  all  heresy. 

3.  CORNELIUS 

Cornelius  was  a  "centurion,"  or  captain  of  a  company  in  the 
Roman  army  consisting  of  about  one  hundred  men.  The  "Italian 
band"  to  which  he  belonged  was  apparently  a  "cohort,"  composed 
of  soldiers  from  Italy.  Cornelius  was  stationed  at  Caesarea,  the 
residence  of  the  procurators  of  Judea.  With  the  favorable 
description  of  his  attitude  to  the  Jews  and  to  the  Jewish  religion, 
Acts  10  :  2,  should  be  compared  what  Luke,  in  his  Gospel,  records 
about  another  centurion.  Luke  7:4,  5.  These  are  sympathetic 
pictures  of  the  "God-fearing"  adherents  of  Judaism,  who  formed  so 
important  a  class  at  the  time  of  the  first  Christian  preaching. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  59-67,  91-98.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on  "Sa- 
maria," "Samaritan,"  "Philip"  (7),  "Simon"  (9),  "Caesarea,"  "Cor- 
nelius." Ramsay,  "Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  66-104. 
Rackham,  pp.  111-124,  141-163.  Lumby,  pp.  97-108,  122-142. 
Plumptre,  pp.  47-55,  63-73.     Cook,  pp.  407-413,  419-430. 


LESSON  XII 
THE  CONVERSION  OF  PAUL 


Christianity  a  supernatural  thing  and  a  gift  of  God's  grace — > 
that  is  the  real  theme  of  the  lesson.  The  theme  is  brought  home 
by  means  of  an  example,  the  example  of  the  apostle  Paul. 

The  religious  experience  of  Paul  is  the  most  striking  phenomenon 
in  the  history  of  the  human  spirit.  It  really  requires  no  defense. 
Give  it  sympathetic  attention,  and  it  is  irresistible.  How  was  it 
produced?  The  answer  of  Paul  himself,  at  least,  is  plain.  Ac- 
cording to  Paul,  his  whole  religious  life  was  due,  not  to  any  natural 
development,  but  to  an  act  of  the  risen  Christ.  That  is  the  argu- 
ment of  the  first  chapter  of  Galatians.  He  was  advancing  in 
Judaism,  he  says,  beyond  his  contemporaries.  He  was  laying 
waste  the  Church.  And  then  suddenly,  when  it  was  least  to  be 
expected,  without  the  influence  of  men,  simply  by  God's  good 
pleasure,  Christ  was  revealed  to  him,  and  all  was  changed.  The 
suddenness,  the  miraculousness  of  the  change  is  the  very  point 
of  the  passage.  Upon  that  marvelous  act  of  God  Paul  bases  the 
whole  of  his  life  work. 

Shall  Paul's  explanation  of  his  life  be  accepted?  It  can  be 
accepted  only  by  the  recognition  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  was  crucified, 
as  a  living  person.  In  an  age  of  doubt,  that  recognition  is  not 
always  easy.  But  if  it  be  refused,  then  the  whole  of  Pauline 
Christianity  is  based  upon  an  illusion.  That  alternative  may  well 
seem  to  be  monstrous.  The  eighth  chapter  of  Romans  has  a  self- 
evidencing  power.  It  has  transformed  the  world.  It  has  entered 
into  the  very  fiber  of  the  human  spirit.  But  it  crumbles  to  pieces 
if  the  appearance  on  the  road  to  Damascus  was  nothing  but  a 
delusive  vision.  Let  us  not  deceive  ourselves.  The  religious 
experience  of  Paul  and  the  whole  of  our  evangelical  piety  are  based 
upon  the  historical  fact  of  the  resurrection.  But  if  so,  then  the 
resurrection  stands  firm.  For  the  full  glory  of  Pauline  Christianity 
becomes  a  witness  to  it.  The  writer  of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans 
must  be  believed.  But  it  is  that  writer  who  says,  "Last  of  all 
.     .     .     he  appeared  to  me  also." 

The  wonder  of  the  conversion  can  be  felt  only  through  an  exercise 

60 


THE  CONVERSION  OF  PAUL  6l 

of  the  historical  imagination.  Imagine  the  surroundings  of  Paul's 
early  life  in  Tarsus,  live  over  again  with  him  the  years  in  Jerusalem, 
enter  with  him  into  his  prospects  of  a  conventional  Jewish  career 
and  into  his  schemes  for  the  destruction  of  the  Church — and  then 
only  can  you  appreciate  with  him  the  catastrophic  wonder  of  Christ's 
grace.  There  was  no  reason  for  the  conversion  of  Paul.  Every- 
thing pointed  the  other  way.  But  Christ  chose  to  make  of  the 
persecutor  an  apostle,  and  the  life  of  Paul  was  the  result.  It  was 
a  divine,  inexplicable  act  of  grace — grace  to  Paul  and  grace  to  us 
who  are  Paul's  debtors.  God's  mercies  are  often  thus.  They 
are  not  of  human  devising.  They  enter  into  human  life  when 
they  are  least  expected,  with  a  sudden  blaze  of  heavenly  glory. 

In  the  review  of  Paul's  early  life  various  questions  emerge.  They 
must  at  least  be  faced,  if  not  answered,  if  the  lesson  is  to  be  vividly 
presented. 

1.  PAUL  AT  TARSUS 

In  the  first  place,  what  was  the  extent  of  the  Greek  influence 
which  was  exerted  upon  Paul  at  Tarsus?  The  question  cannot 
be  answered  with  certainty,  and  widely  differing  views  are  held. 
It  is  altogether  unlikely,  however,  that  the  boy  attended  anything 
like  an  ordinary  Gentile  school.  The  Jewish  strictness  of  the 
family  precludes  that  supposition,  and  it  is  not  required  by  the 
character  of  Paul's  preaching  and  writing.  It  is  true  that  he 
occasionally  quotes  a  Greek  poet.  I  Cor.  15  :  33;  Titus  1  :  12; 
Acts  17  :  28.  It  is  true  again  that  some  passages  in  Paul's  letters 
are  rhetorical — for  example,  I  Cor.  1  :  18-25;  ch.  13 — and  that 
rhetoric  formed  an  important  part  of  Greek  training  in  the  first 
century.  But  Paul's  rhetoric  is  the  rhetoric  of  nature  rather  than 
of  art.  Exalted  by  his  theme  he  falls  unconsciously  into  a  splendid 
rhythm  of  utterance.  Such  rhetoric  could  not  be  learned  in 
school.  Finally,  it  is  true  that  Paul's  vocabulary  is  thought  to 
exhibit  some  striking  similarities  to  that  of  Stoic  writers.  But 
even  if  that  similarity  indicates  acquaintance  on  the  part  of  Paul 
with  the  Stoic  teaching,  such  acquaintance  need  not  have  been 
attained  through  a  study  of  books. 

However,  the  importance  of  Paul's  Greek  environment,  if  it 
must  not  be  exaggerated,  must  on  the  other  hand  not  be  ignored. 
In  the  first  place,  Paul  is  a  consummate  master  of  the  Greek 
language.  He  must  have  acquired  it  in  childhood,  and  indeed  in 
Tarsus  could  hardly  have  failed  to  do  so.     In  the  second  place,. 


62  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

he  was  acquainted  with  the  religious  beliefs  and  practices  of  the 
Greco-Roman  world.  The  speech  at  Athens,  Acts  17  :  22-31, 
shows  how  he  made  use  of  such  knowledge  for  his  preaching.  In 
all  probability  the  first  impressions  were  made  upon  him  at  Tarsus. 
Finally,  from  his  home  in  Tarsus  Paul  derived  that  intimate  knowl- 
edge of  the  political  and  social  relationships  of  the  men  of  his  day 
which,  coupled  with  a  native  delicacy  of  perception  and  fineness 
of  feeling,  resulted  in  the  exquisite  tact  which  he  exhibited  in  his 
missionary  and  pastoral  labors.  The  Tarsian  Jew  of  the  dispersion 
was  a  gentleman  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

That  Aramaic,  as  well  as  Greek,  was  spoken  by  the  family  of 
Paul  is  made  probable  by  Phil.  3  :  5  and  II  Cor.  11  :  22.  The 
word  "Hebrew"  in  these  passages  probably  refers  especially  to  the 
use  of  the  Aramaic  ("Hebrew")  language,  as  in  Acts  6:1,  where 
the  "Hebrews"  in  the  Jerusalem  church  are  contrasted  with  the 
"Grecian  Jews."  "A  Hebrew  of  Hebrews,"  therefore,  probably 
means  "an  Aramaic-speaking  Jew  and  descended  from  Aramaic- 
speaking  Jews."  In  Acts  21  :  40;  22  :  2  it  is  expressly  recorded 
that  Paul  made  a  speech  in  Aramaic  ("Hebrew"),  and  in  Acts 
26  :  14  it  is  said  that  Christ  spoke  to  him  in  the  same  language 
Conceivably,  of  course,  he  might  have  learned  that  language 
during  his  student  days  in  Jerusalem.  But  the  passages  just 
referred  to  make  it  probable  that  it  was  rather  the  language  of 
his  earliest  home.  From  childhood  Paul  knew  both  Aramaic 
and  Greek. 

2.  THE  INNER  LIFE  OF  PAUL  THE  RABBI 

The  most  interesting  question  about  Paul's  life  at  Jerusalem 
concerns  the  condition  of  his  inner  life  before  the  conversion. 
Paul  the  Pharisee  is  an  interesting  study.  What  were  this  man's 
thoughts  and  feelings  and  desires  before  the  grace  of  Christ  made 
him  the  greatest  of  Christian  missionaries? 

The  best  way  to  answer  this  question  would  be  to  ask  Paul 
himself.  One  passage  in  the  Pauline  epistles  has  been  regarded 
as  an  answer  to  the  question.  That  passage  is  Rom.  7  :  14-25. 
There  Paul  describes  the  struggle  of  the  man  who  knows  the  law  of 
God  and  desires  to  accomplish  it,  but  finds  the  flesh  too  strong 
for  him.  If  Paul  is  there  referring  to  his  pre-Christian  life,  then 
the  passage  gives  a  vivid  picture  of  his  fruitless  struggle  as  a 
Pharisee  to  fulfill  the  law.  Many  interpreters,  however,  refer  the 
passage  not  to  the  pre-Christian  life  but  to  the  Christian  life. 


THE  CONVERSION  OF  PAUL  63 

Even  in  the  Christian  life  the  struggle  goes  on  against  sin.  And 
even  if  Paul  is  referring  to  the  pre-Christian  life,  he  is  perhaps 
depicting  it  rather  as  it  really  was  than  as  he  then  thought  it  was. 
The  passage  probably  does  not  mean  that  before  he  became  a 
Christian  Paul  was  fully  conscious  of  the  fruitlessness  of  his  en- 
deavor to  attain  righteousness  by  the  law.  Afterwards  he  saw 
that  his  endeavor  was  fruitless,  but  it  is  doubtful  how  clearly  he 
saw  it  at  the  time. 

It  would,  indeed,  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Paul  as  a  Pharisee 
was  perfectly  happy.  No  man  is  happy  who  is  trying  to  earn 
salvation  by  his  works.  In  his  heart  of  hearts  Paul  must  have 
known  that  his  fulfillment  of  the  law  was  woefully  defective. 
But  such  discontentment  would  naturally  lead  him  only  farther 
on  in  the  same  old  path.  If  his  obedience  was  defective,  let  it  be 
mended  by  increasing  zeal!  The  more  earnest  Paul  was  about 
his  law  righteousness,  the  more  discontented  he  became  with  his 
attainments,  so  much  the  more  zealous  did  he  become  as  a  per- 
secutor. 

Some  have  supposed  that  Paul  was  gradually  getting  nearer 
to  Christianity  before  Christ  appeared  to  him — that  the  Damas- 
cus experience  only  completed  a  process  that  had  already  begun. 
There  were  various  things,  it  is  said,  which  might  lead  the  earnest 
Pharisee  to  consider  Christianity  favorably.  In  the  first  place, 
there  was  the  manifest  impossibility  of  law  righteousness.  Paul 
had  tried  to  keep  the  law  and  had  failed.  What  if  the  Christians 
were  right  about  salvation  by  faith?  In  the  second  place,  there 
were  the  Old  Testament  prophecies  about  a  suffering  servant  of 
Jehovah.  Isa.,  ch.  53.  If  they  referred  to  the  Messiah,  then 
the  cross  might  be  explained,  as  the  Christians  explained  it,  as 
a  sacrifice  for  others.  The  stumblingblock  of  a  crucified  Messiah 
would  thus  be  removed.  In  the  third  place,  there  was  the  noble 
life  and  death  of  the  Christian  martyrs. 

These  arguments  are  not  so  weighty  as  they  seem.  Paul's 
dissatisfaction  with  his  fulfillment  of  the  law,  as  has  already  been 
observed,  might  lead  to  a  more  zealous  effort  to  fulfill  the  law  as 
well  as  to  a  relinquishment  of  the  law.  There  seems  to  be  no  clear 
evidence  that  the  pre-Christian  Jews  ever  contemplated  a  death 
of  the  Messiah  like  the  death  of  Jesus.  On  the  contrary  the 
current  expectation  of  the  Messiah  was  diametrically  opposed  to 
any  such  thing.  And  admiration  of  the  Christian  martyrs  is 
perhaps  too  modern  and  too  Christian  to  be  attributed  to  the 


64  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

Pharisee.  The  fundamental  trouble  with  this  whole  argument  is 
that  it  proves  merely  that  the  Pharisee  Paul  ought  to  have  been 
favorably  impressed  with  Christianity.  So  he  ought,  but  as  a 
matter  of  fact  he  was  not  so  impressed,  and  we  have  the  strongest 
kind  of  evidence  to  prove  that  he  was  not.  The  book  of  The  Acts 
says  so,  and  Paul  says  so  just  as  clearly  in  his  letters.  The  very 
fact  that  when  he  was  converted  he  was  on  a  persecuting  expedi- 
tion, more  ambitious  than  any  that  had  been  attempted  before, 
shows  that  he  was  certainly  not  thinking  favorably  of  Chris- 
tianity. Was  he  considering  the  possibility  that  Christianity 
might  be  true?  Was  he  trying  to  stifle  his  own  inward  uncertainty 
by  the  very  madness  of  his  zeal?  Then,  in  persecuting  the  Church, 
he  was  going  against  his  conscience.  But  in  I  Tim.  1  :  13  he 
distinctly  says  that  his  persecuting  was  done  ignorantly  in  un- 
belief, and  his  attitude  is  the  same  in  his  other  epistles.  If  in 
persecuting  the  Church  he  was  acting  contrary  to  better  con- 
viction, then  that  fact  would  have  constituted  the  chief  element 
in  his  guilt;  yet  in  the  passages  where  he  speaks  with  the  deepest 
contrition  of  his  persecution,  that  particularly  heinous  sin  is  never 
mentioned.  Evidently,  whatever  was  his  guilt,  at  least  he  did 
not  have  to  reproach  himself  with  the  black  sin  of  persecuting 
Christ's  followers  in  the  face  of  even    a  half  conviction. 

Accordingly,  the  words  of  Christ  to  Paul  at  the  time  of  the 
conversion,  "It  is  hard  for  thee  to  kick  against  the  goad,"  Acts 
26  :  14,  do  not  mean  that  Paul  had  been  resisting  an  inward  voice 
of  conscience  in  not  accepting  Christ  before,  but  rather  that 
Christ's  will  for  Paul  was  really  resistless  even  though  Paul  had 
not  known  it  at  all.  Christ's  loving  plan  would  be  carried  out 
in  the  end.  Paul  was  destined  to  be  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 
For  him  to  try  to  be  anything  else  was  as  useless  and  as  painful 
as  it  is  for  the  ox  to  kick  against  the  goad.  Christ  will  have  his 
way. 

Thus  before  his  conversion  Paul  was  moving  away  from  Chris- 
tianity rather  than  toward  it.  Of  course,  in  emphasizing  the 
suddenness  of  the  conversion,  exaggerations  must  be  avoided. 
It  is  absurd,  for  example,  to  suppose  that  Paul  knew  nothing  at 
all  about  Jesus  before  the  Damascus  event.  Of  course  he  knew 
about  him.  Even  if  he  had  been  indifferent,  he  could  hardly  have 
failed  to  hear  the  story  of  the  Galilean  prophet;  and  as  a  matter 
of  fact  he  was  not  indifferent  but  intensely  interested,  though  by 
way  of  opposition.    These  things  were  not  done  in  a  corner.    Paul- 


THE  CONVERSION  OF  PAUL  65 

was  in  Jerusalem  before  and  after  the  crucifixion,  if  not  at  the  very 
time  itself.  The  main  facts  in  the  life  of  Jesus  were  known  to 
friend  and  foe  alike.  Thus  when  in  the  first  chapter  of  Galatians 
Paul  declares  that  he  received  his  gospel  not  through  any  human 
agency  but  directly  from  Christ,  he  cannot  mean  that  the 
risen  Christ  imparted  to  him  the  facts  in  the  earthly  life 
of  Jesus.  It  never  occurred  to  Paul  to  regard  the  bare  facts  as  a 
"gospel."  He  had  the  facts  by  ordinary  word  of  mouth  from  the 
eyewitnesses.  What  he  received  from  the  risen  Christ  was  a  new 
interpretation  of  the  facts.  He  had  known  the  facts  before. 
But  they  had  filled  him  with  hatred.  He  had  known  about 
Jesus.  But  the  more  he  had  known  about  him,  the  more  he  had 
hated  him.  And  then  Christ  himself  appeared  to  him!  It  might 
naturally  have  been  an  appearance  in  wrath,  a  thunderstroke  of 
the  just  vengeance  of  the  Messiah.  Probably  that  was  Paul's 
first  thought  when  he  heard  the  words,  "I  am  Jesus  whom  thou 
persecutest."  But  such  was  not  the  Lord's  will.  The  purpose 
of  the  Damascus  wonder  was  not  destruction  but  divine  fellowship 
and  world-wide  service. 

3.  PAUL'S  EXPERIENCE  AND  OURS 

In  one  sense,  the  experience  of  Paul  is  the  experience  of  every 
Christian.  Not,  of  course,  in  form.  It  is  a  great  mistake  to 
demand  of  every  man  that  he  shall  be  able,  like  Paul,  to  give  day 
and  hour  of  his  conversion.  Many  men,  it  is  true,  still  have  such 
a  definite  experience.  It  is  not  pathological.  It  may  result  in 
glorious  Christian  lives.  But  it  is  not  universal,  and  it  should  not 
be  induced  by  tactless  methods.  The  children  of  Christian  homes 
often  seem  to  grow  up  into  the  love  of  Christ.  When  they  decide 
to  unite  themselves  definitely  with  the  Church,  the  decision  need 
not  necessarily  come  with  anguish  of  soul.  It  may  be  simply  the 
culmination  of  a  God-encircled  childhood,  a  recognition  of  what 
God  has  already  done  rather  than  the  acquisition  of  something 
new.  But  after  all,  these  differences  are  merely  in  the  manner 
of  God's  working.  In  essence,  true  Christian  experience  is  always 
the  same,  and  in  essence  it  is  always  like  the  experience  of  Paul. 
It  is  no  mere  means  of  making  better  citizens,  but  an  end  in  itself. 
It  is  no  product  of  man's  effort,  but  a  divine  gift.  Whatever  be 
the  manner  of  its  coming,  it  is  a  heavenly  vision.  Christ  still 
lives  in  the  midst  of  glory.  And  still  he  appears  to  sinful  men — 
though  not  now  to  the  bodily  eye — drawing  them  out  of  sin  and 

Sen.  T.  ILL  1. 


66  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

misery  and  bondage  to  a  transitory  world  into  communion  with 
the  holy  and  eternal  God. 

The  result  of  Paul's  vision  was  service.  How  far  his  destination 
as  apostle  to  the  Gentiles  was  made  known  to  him  at  once  is  perhaps 
uncertain.  It  depends  partly  upon  the  interpretation  of  Acts 
26  :  14-18.  Are  those  words  intended  to  be  part  of  what  was 
spoken  at  the  very  time  of  the  conversion?  There  is  no  insuper- 
able objection  to  that  view.  At  any  rate,  no  matter  how  much  or 
how  little  was  revealed  at  once,  the  real  purpose  of  Christ  in  calling 
him  was  clearly  that  he  should  be  the  leader  of  the  Gentile  mission. 
Gal.  1  :  16.  He  was  saved  in  order  that  he  might  save  others. 
It  is  so  normally  with  every  Christian.  Every  one  of  us  is  given 
not  only  salvation,  but  also  labor.  In  that  labor  we  can  use  every 
bit  of  preparation  that  is  ours,  even  if  it  was  acquired  before  we 
became  Christians.  Paul,  the  apostle,  used  his  Greek  training 
as  well  as  his  knowledge  of  the  Old  Testament.  We  can  use 
whatever  talents  we  possess.  The  Christian  life  is  not  a  life  of 
idleness.  It  is  like  the  life  of  the  world  in  being  full  of  labor. 
But  it  differs  from  that  life  in  that  its  labor  is  always  worth  while. 
Connection  with  heaven  does  not  mean  idle  contemplation,  but  a 
vantage  ground  of  power.  You  cannot  move  the  world  without 
a  place  to  stand. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  68-85.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  article  on  "Damascus." 
Ramsay,  "Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  1 13-120;  "St.  Paul 
the  Traveller  and  the  Roman  Citizen,"  pp.  29-39;  "The  Cities  of  St. 
Paul,"  pp.  85-244  (on  Tarsus).  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  chs.  ii  and  iii.  Lewin,  "The  Life  and 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  chs.  i  and  iv.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  St.  Paul," 
pp.  1-42.  Rackham,  pp.  124-135,  421-424,  462-470.  Lumby,  pp.  108- 
116,  302-307,  344-349-  Plumptre,  pp.  55"6i,  150-152,  165-167.  Cook, 
pp.  413-417,  498-500,  5i6-5i9- 


LESSON  XIII 
THE  CHURCH  AT  ANTIOCH 


Christianity  originated  in  an  obscure  corner  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  in  the  midst  of  a  very  peculiar  people.  At  first,  it  was 
entirely  out  of  relation  to  the  larger  life  of  the  time.  The  atmos- 
phere of  the  Gospels  is  as  un-Greek  as  could  be  imagined;  the  very 
conception  of  Messiahship  is  distinctively  Jewish. 

Yet  this  Jewish  sect  soon  entered  upon  the  conquest  of  the  empire, 
and  the  Jewish  Messiah  became  the  Saviour  of  the  world.  Starting 
from  Jerusalem,  the  new  sect  spread  within  a  few  decades  almost  to 
the  remotest  corners  of  the  civilized  world.  This  remarkable 
extension  was  not  the  work  of  any  one  man  or  group  of  men. 
It  seemed  rather  to  be  due  to  some  mysterious  power  of  growth, 
operating  in  many  directions  and  in  many  ways.  In  this  manifold 
extension  of  the  gospel,  however,  the  central  event  of  to-day's 
lesson  stands  out  with  special  clearness.  Christianity  began  as 
a  Jewish  movement,  quite  incongruous  with  the  larger  life  of  the 
empire.  What  would  be  the  result  of  its  first  real  contact  with 
the  culture  of  the  time?     This  question  was  answered  at  Antioch. 

At  Antioch,  the  principles  of  the  Gentile  mission  had  to  be 
established  once  for  all — those  principles  which  have  governed 
the  entire  subsequent  history  of  the  Church.  The  extension  of 
the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles  was  not  a  mere  overcoming  of  racial 
prejudice,  for  the  separateness  of  Israel  had  been  of  divine  appoint- 
ment; it  involved  rather  the  recognition  that  a  new  dispensation 
had  begun.  Primitive  Christianity  was  not  governed  merely  by 
considerations  of  practical  expediency;  it  sought  justification  for 
every  new  step  in^the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  and  in  the  fundamental 
principles  of  the  gospel.  The  development  of  those  fundamental 
principles  was  necessary  in  order  to  show  that  Christianity  was 
really  more  than  a  Jewish  sect.  Then  as  always,  religion  without 
theology  would  have  been  a  weak  and  flabby  thing.  Christianity 
is  not  merely  an  instrument  for  the  improving  of  social  conditions, 
but  rather  an  answer  to  the  fundamental  questions  of  the  soul. 
It  can  never  do  without  thinking,  and  Christian  thinking  is  theology. 

Fortunately  the  church  at  Antioch  did  not  long  remain  without 

67 


68  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

a  theologian.  Its  theologian  was  Paul.  Paul  was  not  the  founder 
of  the  church  at  Antioch ;  but  the  theology  of  Paul  was  what  gave 
to  that  church  its  really  fundamental  importance  in  the  history 
of  the  world. 

The  lesson  for  to-day  is  of  extraordinary  richness  and  variety. 
Much  can  be  learned,  for  example,  from  the  characters  of  the  story. 
Barnabas,  with  his  generous  recognition  of  the  great  man  who 
was  soon  to  overshadow  him;  those  obscure  men  of  Cyprus  and 
Cyrene,  not  even  mentioned  by  name,  whose  work  at  Antioch 
was  one  of  the  great  turning  points  of  history;  Agabus,  the  prophet, 
and  the  charitable  brethren  of  Antioch;  Rhoda,  the  serving  girl, 
and  the  prayerful  assembly  in  the  house  of  the  mother  of  Mark — 
every  one  of  these  teaches  some  special  lesson.  One  lesson, 
moreover,  may  be  learned  from  them  all — God  is  the  real  leader 
of  the  Church,  and  true  disciples,  though  different  in  character 
and  in  attainments,  are  all  sharers  in  a  mighty  work. 

In  what  follows,  an  attempt  will  be  made  to  throw  light  upon 
a  few  of  the  historical  questions  which  are  suggested  by  the  narra- 
tive in  The  Acts,  and  to  picture  as  vividly  as  possible  the  scene  of 
these  stirring  events. 

1.  THE  ACTS  AND  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES 

The  differences  between  the  narrative  in  The  Acts  and  the 
account  which  Paul  gives  of  the  same  events  have  caused  con- 
siderable difficulty.  This  very  difficulty,  however,  is  by  no  means 
an  unmixed  evil;  for  it  shows  at  least  that  Luke  was  entirely  in- 
dependent of  the  Epistles.  If  he  had  employed  the  Epistles  in 
the  composition  of  his  book  he  would  surely  have  avoided  even 
the  appearance  of  contradicting  them.  The  divergences  between 
The  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epistles,  therefore,  can  only  mean  that 
Luke  did  not  use  the  Epistles  when  he  wrote;  and  since  the  Epistles 
came  to  be  generally  used  at  a  very  early  time,  The  Acts  cannot 
have  been  written  at  so  late  a  date  as  is  often  supposed.  But  if 
the  book  was  written  at  an  early  time,  then  there  is  every  probability 
that  the  information  which  it  contains  is  derived  from  trust- 
worthy sources. 

Thus  the  very  divergences  between  The  Acts  and  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  unless  indeed  they  should  amount  to  positive  contradic- 
tions, strengthen  the  argument  for  the  early  date  and  high  histori- 
cal value  of  the  Lucan  work.  The  independence  of  The  Acts  is 
supported  also  by  the  complete  absence  of  striking  verbal  similarity 


THE  CHURCH  AT  ANTIOCH  69 

between  the  narrative  in  The  Acts  and  the  corresponding  passages 
in  the  Epistles.  Even  where  the  details  of  the  two  accounts  are 
similar,  the  words  are  different.  The  few  unimportant  coinci- 
dences in  language  are  altogether  insufficient  to  overthrow  this 
general  impression  of  independence. 

The  most  natural  supposition,  therefore,  is  that  in  The  Acts 
and  in  the  Epistles  we  have  two  independent  and  trustworthy 
accounts  of  the  same  events.  This  supposition  is  really  borne  out 
by  the  details  of  the  two  narratives.  There  are  differences,  but 
the  differences  are  only  what  is  to  be  expected  in  two  narratives 
which  were  written  from  entirely  different  points  of  view  and  in 
complete  independence  of  one  another.  Contradictions  have 
been  detected  only  by  pressing  unduly  the  language  of  one  source 
or  the  other.  Thus,  in  reading  The  Acts  alone,  one  might  suppose 
that  Paul  spent  the  whole  time  between  his  conversion  and  his 
first  visit  to  Jerusalem  in  Damascus,  and  that  this  period  was  less 
than  three  years;  but  these  suppositions  are  only  inferences. 
Apparently  Luke  was  not  aware  of  the  journey  to  Arabia;  but  an 
incomplete  narrative  is  not  necessarily  inaccurate.  Again,  in  the 
account  of  that  first  visit  to  Jerusalem,  the  reader  of  The  Acts 
might  naturally  suppose  that  more  than  one  of  the  Twelve  was 
present,  that  the  main  purpose  of  the  journey  was  rather  to  engage 
in  preaching  than  to  make  the  acquaintance  of  Peter,  and  that  the 
visit  lasted  longer  than  fifteen  days;  and  on  the  other  hand,  the 
reader  of  Galatians  might  perhaps  suppose  that  instead  of  preaching 
in  Jerusalem  Paul  remained,  while  there,  in  strict  retirement. 
Again,  however,  these  suppositions  would  be  inferences;  and  the 
falsity  of  them  simply  shows  how  cautious  the  historian  should 
be  in  reading  between  the  lines  of  a  narrative.  Finally,  the  dif- 
ferences between  Paul  and  Luke  are  overbalanced  by  the  striking 
and  undesigned  agreements. 

In  Galatians,  Paul  does  not  mention  the  visit  which  he  and 
Barnabas  made  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  famine.  This 
conclusion  has  been  avoided  by  those  scholars  who  with  Ramsay 
identify  the  "famine  visit"  with  the  visit  mentioned  in  Gal.  2  :  1-10. 
The  more  usual  view,  however,  is  that  Gal.  2  :  1-10  is  to  be  regarded 
as  parallel,  not  with  Acts'  11  :  30;  12  :  25,  but  with  Acts  15  :  1-30. 
The  second  visit  mentioned  by  Paul  is  thus  identified  with 
the  third  visit  mentioned  by  Luke.  Paul  did  not  mention  the 
famine  visit  because,  as  was  probably  admitted  even  by  his  oppo- 
nents in  Galatia,  the  apostles  at  the  time  of  that  visit  were  all  out 


70  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

of  the  city,  so  that  there  was  no  chance  of  a  meeting  with  them. 
The  subject  under  discussion  in  Galatians  was  not  Paul's  life  in 
general,  but  the  relation  between  Paul  and  the  original  apostles. 

2.  THE  PREACHING  TO  "GREEKS" 

In  Acts  11  :  20,  the  best  manuscripts  read  "spake  unto  the 
Hellenists"  instead  of  "spake  unto  the  Greeks."  The  word 
"Hellenist"  usually  means  "Grecian  Jew."  Here,  however,  if  this 
word  is  to  be  read,  it  must  refer  not  to  Jews,  but  to  Gentiles; 
for  the  contrast  with  the  preaching  to  Jews  that  is  mentioned 
just  before,  is  the  very  point  of  the  verse.  Perhaps  at  this  point 
the  manuscripts  which  read  "Greeks"  (that  is,  "Gentiles")  are 
correct.  In  either  case,  the  meaning  is  fixed  by  the  context. 
These  Jews  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene,  when  they  arrived  at  Antioch 
certainly  began  to  preach  regularly  to  Gentiles. 

3.  PETERS  ESCAPE  FROM  PRISON 

In  Acts  12  :  1-24,  Luke  brings  the  account  of  affairs  in  Jerusalem 
up  to  the  time  which  has  already  been  reached  in  the  narrative 
about  Antioch.  The  journey  of  Barnabas  and  Paul  to  Jerusalem, 
Acts  11  :  30;  12  :  25,  supplied  the  connecting  link.  While  the 
church  at  Antioch  was  progressing  in  the  manner  described  in 
Acts  11  :  19-30,  a  persecution  had  been  carried  on  in  Jerusalem 
by  Herod  Agrippa  I.  The  escape  of  Peter  is  narrated  in  an  ex- 
traordinarily lifelike  way.  Evidently  Luke  was  in  possession  of 
first-hand  information.  The  vividness  of  the  narrative  is  very 
significant.  It  shows  that  the  unmistakable  trustworthiness  of 
The  Acts  extends  even  to  those  happenings  which  were  most  clearly 
miraculous.  The  supernatural  cannot  be  eliminated  from  apostolic 
history. 

4.  ANTIOCH 

Antioch  on  the  Orontes  was  founded  by  Seleucus  Nicator,  the 
first  monarch  of  the  Seleucid  dynast}',  and  under  his  successors  it 
remained  the  capital  of  the  Syrian  kingdom.  When  that  kingdom 
was  conquered  by  the  Romans,  the  political  importance  of  Antioch 
did  not  suffer.  Antioch  became  under  the  Romans  not  only  the 
capital  of  the  province  Syria  but  also  the  residence  of  the  emperors 
and  high  officials  when  they  were  in  the  east.  It  may  be  regarded 
as  a  sort  of  eastern  capital  of  the  empire. 

The  political  importance  of  Antioch  was  no  greater  than  its 


THE  CHURCH  AT  ANTIOCH  7 1 

commercial  importance.  Situated  near  the  northeastern  corner 
of  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  where  the  Mediterranean  coast  is  nearer 
to  the  Euphrates  than  at  any  other  point,  where  the  Orontes  valley 
provided  easy  communication  with  the  east  and  the  Syrian  gates 
with  the  west,  with  a  magnificent  artificial  harbor  at  Seleucia, 
about  twenty  miles  distant,  Antioch  naturally  became  the  great 
meeting  point  for  the  trade  of  east  and  west.  It  is  not  surprising 
that  Antioch  was  the  third  city  of  the  empire — after  Rome  and 
Alexandria. 

The  city  was  built  on  a  plain  between  the  Orontes  on  the  north 
and  the  precipitous  slopes  of  Mount  Silpius  on  the  south.  A 
great  wall  extended  over  the  rugged  heights  of  the  mountain  and 
around  the  city.  A  magnificent  street  led  through  the  city  from 
east  to  west.  The  buildings  were  of  extraordinary  magnificence. 
Perhaps  as  magnificent  as  the  city  itself  was  the  famous  Daphne, 
a  neighboring  shrine  and  pleasure  resort,  well-known  for  its  gilded 
vice. 

The  dominant  language  of  Antioch,  from  the  beginning,  had 
been  Greek.  The  Seleucids  prided  themselves  on  the  Greek  culture 
of  their  court,  and  Roman  rule  introduced  no  essential  change. 
Of  course,  along  with  the  Greek  language  and  Greek  culture  went 
a  large  admixture  of  eastern  blood  and  eastern  custom.  Like  the 
other  great  cities  of  the  empire,  Antioch  was  a  meeting  place  of 
various  peoples,  a  typical  cosmopolitan  center  of  a  world-wide 
empire.     The  Jewish  population,  of  course,  was  numerous. 

Such  was  the  seat  of  the  apostolic  missionary  church.  Almost 
lost  at  first  in  the  seething  life  of  the  great  city,  that  church  was 
destined  to  outlive  all  the  magnificence  that  surrounded  it.  A  new 
seed  had  been  implanted  in  the  ancient  world,  and  God  would  give 
the  increase. 


In  the  Library.— Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
85-90,  98-110.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on  "Agabus," 
"Antioch,"  "Arabia,"  "Aretas,"  "Barnabas,"  "Herod"  (3).  Ram- 
say, "St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman  Citizen,"  pp.  40-69; 
"Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  121-128.  Lewin,  "The  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  chs.  v,  vi  and  vii.  Conybeare  and  Howson, 
"The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  ch.  iv.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of 
St.  Paul,"  pp.  44-63.  Lumby,  pp.  1 16-122,  142-155,  307-309.  Cook, 
pp.  416-418,  430-433,  500,  50i.  Plumptre,  pp.  60-62,  73-79,  152. 
Rackham,  pp.  136-141,  163-184. 


Christianity  Established  Among 
the  Gentiles 

The  Principles  and  Practice 
of  the  Gospel 


LESSON  XIV 
THE  GOSPEL  TO  THE  GENTILES 


It  was  a  dramatic  moment  when  Paul  and  Barnabas,  with  their 
helper,  set  sail  from  Seleucia,  on  the  waters  of  the  Mediterranean. 
Behind  them  lay  Syria  and  Palestine  and  the  history  of  the  chosen 
people;  in  front  of  them  was  the  west.  The  religion  of  Israel  had 
emerged  from  its  age-long  seclusion ;  it  had  entered  at  last  upon  the 
conquest  of  the  world. 

The  message  that  crossed  the  strait  to  Cyprus  was  destined  to 
be  carried  over  broader  seas.  A  mighty  enterprise  was  begun. 
It  was  an  audacious  thought!  The  missionaries  might  well  have 
been  overpowered  by  what  lay  before  them — by  the  power  of  a 
world  empire,  by  the  prestige  of  a  brilliant  civilization.  How 
insignificant  were  their  own  weapons!  Would  they  ever  even 
gain  a  hearing?  But  though  the  enterprise  was  begun  in  weakness 
it  was  begun  in  faith.  At  their  departure  from  Antioch  the  mis- 
sionaries were  "committed  to  the  grace  of  God." 

The  account  of  this  first  missionary  journey  is  one  of  the  most 
fascinating  passages  in  The  Acts.  The  interest  never  flags;  incident 
follows  incident  in  wonderful  variety.  In  reading  this  narrative, 
we  are  transplanted  into  the  midst  of  the  ancient  world,  we  come 
to  breathe  the  very  atmosphere  of  that  cosmopolitan  age.  In  the 
lesson  of  to-day  the  teacher  has  an  unusual  opportunity.  If  he 
uses  it  well,  he  may  cause  the  Bible  story  to  live  again.  Absolutely 
essential  to  that  end  is  the  judicious  use  of  a  map — preferably 
something  larger  than  the  small  sketch  map  of  the  Text  Book. 
A  travel  narrative  without  a  map  is  a  hopeless  jumble.  The  map 
is  an  aid  both  to  memory  and  to  imagination.  Tracing  the  route 
of  the  missionaries  on  the  map,  the  teacher  should  endeavor  to 
call  up  the  scenes  through  which  they  passed.  The  student  should 
be  made  to  see  the  waters  of  the  Mediterranean,  with  the  hills  of 
Cyprus  beyond,  the  interminable  stretches  of  the  Roman  roads, 
the  lofty  mountains  of  the  Taurus,  the  perils  of  rivers  and  the 
perils  of  robbers,  the  teeming  population  of  the  countless  cities — 
and  through  it  all  the  simple  missionaries  of  the  cross,  almost 
unnoticed  amid  the  turmoil  of  the  busy  world,  but  rich  in  the 

Sen.  T.  III.  2.  75 


76  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

possession  of  a  world-conquering  gospel  and  resistless  through  the 
power  of  the  living  God. 

1.  THE  PROPHETS  AND  TEACHERS 

Both  prophecy  and  teaching  were  gifts  of  the  Spirit.  I  Cor. 
12  :  28-31.  Prophecy  was  immediate  revelation  of  the  divine 
plan  or  of  the  divine  will;  teaching,  apparently,  was  logical  develop- 
ment of  the  truth  already  given.  Which  of  the  men  who  are 
mentioned  in  Acts  13  :  1  were  prophets  and  which  were  teachers 
is  not  clear.  If  any  division  is  intended  it  is  probably  between  the 
first  three  and  the  last  two.  For  this  grouping  there  is  perhaps 
some  slight  indication  in  the  connectives  that  are  used  in  the  Greek, 
but  the  matter  is  not  certain.  Perhaps  all  five  of  the  men  were 
possessed  of  both  gifts. 

Lucius  was  perhaps  one  of  the  founders  of  the  church,  for  he 
came  from  Cyrene.  Compare  Acts  11  :  20.  Manaen  is  an  in- 
teresting figure.  He  is  called  " foster-brother"  of  Herod  the 
tetrarch.  The  word  translated  "foster-brother"  is  apparently 
sometimes  used  in  a  derived  sense,  to  designate  simply  an  intimate 
associate  of  a  prince.  If  that  be  the  meaning  here,  then  at  least 
one  member  of  the  church  at  Antioch  was  a  man  of  some  social 
standing.  In  Antioch,  as  in  Corinth,  probably  "not  many  wise 
after  the  flesh,  not  many  mighty,  not  many  noble"  were  called, 
I  Cor.  1  :  26;  but  in  Antioch  as  in  Corinth  there  were  exceptions. 
The  Herod  who  is  here  meant  is  Herod  Antipas,  the  "Herod"  of 
the  Gospels. 

2.     ELYMAS 

When  the  Jewish  sorcerer  is  first  mentioned  he  is  called  Bar- 
Jesus — that  is,  "son  of  Jesus,"  Jesus  being  a  common  Jewish  name. 
Then,  a  little  below,  the  same  man  is  called  "Elymas  the  sorcerer," 
and  the  explanation  is  added,  "for  so  is  his  name  by  interpretation." 
Apparently  the  new  name  Elymas  is  introduced  without  explanation, 
and  then  the  Greek  word  for  "sorcerer"  is  introduced  as  a  translation 
of  that.  The  word  Elymas  is  variously  derived  from  an  Arabic  word 
meaning  "wise,"  or  an  Aramaic  word  meaning  "strong."  In  either 
case  the  Greek  word,  "magos,"  for  which  our  English  Bible  has 
"sorcerer,"  is  a  fair  equivalent.  That  Greek  word  is  the  word  that 
appears  also  in  Matt.  2:1,  7,  16,  where  the  English  Bible  has 
"Wise-men";  and  words  derived  from  the  same  root  are  used  to 
describe  Simon  of  Samaria  in  Acts  8:9,  11.  The  word  could 
designate   men   of  different   character.     Some   "magi"    might   be 

Sen.  T.  Ill,  2. 


THE  GOSPEL  TO  THE  GENTILES  77 

regarded  as  students  of  natural  science;  in  others,  superstition  and 
charlatanism  were  dominant. 

3.     SAUL  AND  PAUL 

At  Acts  13  :9  Luke  introduces  the  name  "Paul" — "Saul,  who  is 
also  called  Paul."  Previously  the  narrative  always  uses  the 
Jewish  name  "Saul";  after  this  "Paul"  appears  with  equal  regu- 
larity, except  in  the  accounts  of  the  conversion,  where  in  three 
verses  a  special,  entirely  un-Greek  form  of  "Saul"  is  used.  Acts 
22  :  7,  13;  26  :  14.  Since  in  our  passage  in  the  original  the  name  of 
the  proconsul,  Paulus,  is  exactly  like  the  name  of  the  apostle,  some 
have  supposed  that  Paul  assumed  a  new  name  in  honor  of  his 
distinguished  convert.  That  is  altogether  unlikely.  More  probable 
is  the  suggestion  that  although  Paul  had  both  names  from  the 
beginning,  Luke  is  led  to  introduce  the  name  Paul  at  just  this 
point  because  of  the  coincidence  with  the  name  of  the  proconsul. 
Even  this  supposition,  however,  is  extremely  doubtful.  Probably 
the  Roman  name,  which  Paul  uses  invariably  in  his  letters,  is 
introduced  at  this  point  simply  because  here  for  the  first  time  Paul 
comes  prominently  forward  in  a  distinctly  Roman  environment. 

4.     PAUL  AND  BARNABAS 

Connected  with  this  variation  in  name  is  the  reversal  in  the 
relation  between  Paul  and  Barnabas.  Previously  Barnabas  has 
been  given  the  priority;  but  immediately  after  the  incident  at 
Paphos  the  missionaries  are  designated  as  "Paul  and  his  company," 
Acts  13  :  13,  and  thereafter  when  the  two  are  mentioned  together, 
Paul,  except  at  Acts  14  :  12,  14;  15  :  12,  25,  appears  first.  In  the 
presence  of  the  Roman  proconsul,  Paul's  Roman  citizenship 
perhaps  caused  him  to  take  the  lead;  and  then  inherent  supe- 
riority made  his  leadership  permanent. 

5.     THE  RETURN  OF  JOHN  MARK 

The  reasons  for  John  Mark's  return  from  Perga  to  Jerusalem 
can  only  be  surmised.  Perhaps  he  was  simply  unwilling,  for  some 
reason  sufficient  to  him  but  insufficient  to  Paul,  to  undertake  the 
hardships  of  the  journey  into  the  interior.  Certainly  it  was  an 
adventurous  journey.      Paul  was  not  always  an  easy  man  to  follow. 

The  severity  of  Paul's  judgment  of  Mark  was  not  necessarily 
so  great  as  has  sometimes  been  supposed.  One  purpose  of  the 
second  journey  was  to  revisit  the  churches  of  the  first  journey.    Acts 


78  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

15  :  36.  Whether  for  good  or  for  bad  reasons,  Mark,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  had  not  been  with  the  missionaries  on  a  large  part  of  that 
first  journey,  and  was,  therefore,  unknown  to  many  of  the  churches. 
For  this  reason,  perhaps  as  much  as  on  account  of  moral  objec- 
tions, Paul  considered  Mark  an  unsuitable  helper.  In  his  later 
epistles  Paul  speaks  of  Mark  in  the  most  cordial  way.  Col.  4  :  10; 
Philem.  24;  II  Tim.  4:11.  In  the  last  passage,  he  even  says  that 
Mark  was  useful  to  him  for  ministering — exactly  what  he  had  not 
been  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  missionary  journey. 

6.     HARDSHIPS  AND  PERSECUTIONS 

It  is  evident  from  II  Cor.  11  :  23-27  that  Luke  has  recorded  only 
a  small  fraction  of  the  hardships  which  Paul  endured  as  a  missionary 
of  the  cross.  The  tendency  to  lay  exaggerated  stress  upon  martyr- 
dom and  suffering,  which  runs  riot  in  the  later  legends  of  the  saints, 
is  in  The  Acts  conspicuous  by  its  absence.  Of  the  trials  which  are 
vouched  for  by  the  unimpeachable  testimony  of  Paul  himself, 
only  a  few  may  be  identified  in  the  Lucan  narrative.  It  is  natural, 
however,  to  suppose  that  some  of  the  "perils  of  rivers"  and  "perils 
of  robbers"  were  encountered  on  the  journey  through  the  defiles 
of  the  Taurus  mountains  from  Perga  to  Pisidian  Antioch,  and  the 
one  stoning  which  Paul  mentions  is  clearly  to  be  identified  with  the 
adventure  at  Lystra.  In  II  Tim.  3:11  Paul  mentions  the  perse- 
cutions at  Antioch,  Iconium  and  Lystra. 

7.     GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  FIRST  JOURNEY 

The  first  missionary  journey  led  the  missionaries  into  three 
Roman  provinces:  Cyprus,  Pamphylia  and  Galatia.  The  name 
"Galatia"  had  originally  designated  a  district  in  the  north  central 
part  of  Asia  Minor,  which  had  been  colonized  by  certain  Celtic 
tribes  several  centuries  before  Christ.  By  the  Romans,  however, 
other  districts  were  added  to  this  original  Galatia,  and  in  25  B.  C. 
the  whole  complex  was  organized  into  an  imperial  province  under 
the  name  Galatia.  In  the  first  century  after  Christ,  therefore, 
the  name  Galatia  could  be  used  in  two  distinct  senses.  In  the 
first  place,  in  the  earlier,  popular  sense,  it  could  designate  Galatia 
proper.  In  the  second  place,  in  the  later,  official  sense,  it  could 
designate  the  whole  Roman  province,  which  included  not  only 
Galatia  proper,  but  also  parts  of  a  number  of  other  districts,  in- 
cluding Phrygia  and  Lycaonia.  Of  the  cities  visited  on  the  first 
missionary  journey,  Pisidian  Antioch — which  was  called  "Pisidian" 


THE  GOSPEL  TO  THE  GENTILES  79 

because  it  was  near  Pisidia — and  Iconium  were  in  Phrygia,  and 
Lystra  and  Derbe  in  Lycaonia;  but  all  four  were  included  in  the 
province  of  Galatia.  Many  scholars  suppose  that  the  churches 
in  these  cities  were  the  churches  which  Paul  addresses  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians.  That  view  is  called  the  "South  Galatian  theory." 
Others — adherents  of  the  "North  Galatian  theory" — suppose  that 
the  epistle  is  addressed  to  churches  in  Galatia  proper,  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  Roman  province,  which  were  founded  on  the  second 
missionary  journey.  This  question  will  be  noticed  again  in  con- 
nection with  the  epistle. 

8.     TIME     OF     THE  FIRST  JOURNEY 

Luke  gives  very  little  indication  of  the  amount  of  time  which 
was  consumed  on  this  first  journey.  The  hasty  reader  probably 
estimates  the  time  too  low,  since  only  a  few  incidents  are  narrated. 
The  rapidity  of  the  narrative  should  not  be  misinterpreted  as 
indicating  cursoriness  of  the  labor.  The  passage  through  Cyprus, 
Acts  13  :  6,  was  probably  accompanied  by  evangelizing;  the  exten- 
sion of  the  gospel  through  the  whole  region  of  Antioch,  v.  49,  must 
have  occupied  more  than  a  few  days;  the  stay  at  Iconium  is  desig- 
nated as  "long  time,"  Acts  14  : 3;  the  change  of  attitude  on  the 
part  of  the  Lystran  populace,  v.  19,  was  probably  not  absolutely 
sudden;  not  only  Lystra  and  Derbe  but  also  the  surrounding 
country  were  evangelized,  v.  6;  and  finally  the  missionaries  could 
hardly  have  returned  to  the  cities  from  which  they  had  been 
driven  out,  v.  21,  unless  the  heat  of  persecution  had  been  allowed 
to  cool.  Perhaps  a  full  year  would  not  be  too  high  an  estimate  of 
the  time  that  was  occupied  by  the  journey,  and  still  higher  estimates 
are  by  no  means  excluded. 

9.     THE  SCENE  AT  LYSTRA 

The  account  of  the  incident  at  Lystra  is  one  of  those  inimitable 
bits  of  narrative  which  imprint  upon  The  Acts  the  indisputable 
stamp  of  historicity.  Lystra,  though  a  Roman  colony,  lay  some- 
what off  the  beaten  track  of  culture  and  of  trade;  hence  the  extreme 
superstition  of  the  populace  is  what  might  be  expected.  It  may 
seem  rather  strange  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  should  have  been 
identified  with  great  gods  of  Olympus  rather  than  with  lesser 
divinities  or  spirits,  but  who  can  place  a  limit  upon  the  superstition 
of  an  uncultured  people  of  the  ancient  world?  The  identification 
may  have  been  rendered  easier  by  the  legend  of  Philemon  and 


80  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

Baucis,  which  has  been  preserved  for  us  by  Ovid,  the  Latin  poet. 
According  to  that  legend,  Zeus  and  Hermes  appeared,  once  upon 
a  time,  in  human  form  in  Phrygia,  the  same  general  region  in  which 
Lystra  was  situated.  Zeus  and  Hermes  are  the  gods  with  whom 
Barnabas  and  Paul  were  identified;  the  English  Bible  simply  sub- 
stitutes for  these  Greek  names  the  names  of  the  corresponding 
Roman  deities.  The  temple  of  Zeus-before-the-city  and  the  prep- 
arations for  sacrifices  are  described  in  a  most  lifelike  way,  in  full 
accord  with  what  is  known  of  ancient  religion.  We  find  ourselves 
here  in  a  somewhat  different  atmosphere  from  that  which  prevails 
in  most  of  the  scenes  described  in  The  Acts.  It  is  a  pagan  atmos- 
phere, and  an  atmosphere  of  ruder  superstition  than  that  which 
prevailed  in  the  great  cities.  The  "speech  of  Lycaonia,"  v.  11,  is 
an  especially  characteristic  touch.  Apparently  the  all-pervading 
Greek  was  understood  at  Lystra  even  by  the  populace;  but  in  the 
excitement  of  their  superstition  they  fell  very  naturally  into  their 
native  language. 

As  in  the  case  of  Peter's  release  from  prison,  so  in  this  incident, 
wonderful  lifelikeness  of  description  is  coupled  with  a  miracle. 
The  scene  at  Lystra  is  unintelligible  without  the  miraculous  healing 
of  the  lame  man,  with  which  it  begins.  It  is  impossible,  in  The 
Acts  as  well  as  in  the  Gospels,  to  separate  the  miraculous  from  the 
rest  of  the  narrative.  The  evident  truthfulness  of  the  story  applies 
to  the  supernatural  elements  as  well  as  to  the  rest.  The  early  Chris- 
tian mission  is  evidently  real;  but  it  is  just  as  evidently  super- 
natural. It  moved  through  the  varied  scenes  of  the  real  world,  but 
it  was  not  limited  by  the  world.  It  was  animated  by  a  myste- 
rious, superhuman  power. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  111-122.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on  "Cyprus," 
"Antioch"  (2),  "Iconium,"  "Lystra,"  "Derbe,"  "Galatia."  Hastings, 
"Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Muir,  article  on  "Cyprus";  Massie,  article 
on  "Bar- Jesus";  Headlam,  article  on  "Paulus,  Sergius";  Ramsay, 
articles  on  "Antioch  in  Pisidia,"  "Iconium,"  "Lystra,"  "Derbe," 
"Galatia."  Ramsay,  "St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman  Citizen," 
pp.  64-129;  "The  Cities  of  St.  Paul,"  pp.  247-419;  "Pictures  of  the 
Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  129-153.  Lewin,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of 
St.  Paul,"  chapter  viii.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The  Life  and 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  chapters  v  and  vi.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  St. 
Paul,"  pp.  65-71.  Lumby,  pp.  155-183.  Cook,  pp.  437-451.  Plumptre, 
pp.  79-93.     Rackham,  pp.  194-238. 


LESSON  XV 
THE  COUNCIL  AT  JERUSALEM 


The  lesson  for  to-day  deals  with  one  of  the  most  important  events 
in  apostolic  history.  At  the  Jerusalem,  council  the  principles  of 
the  Gentile  mission  and  of  the  entire  life  of  the  Church  were  brought 
to  clear  expression.  If  the  original  apostles  had  agreed  with  the 
Judaizers  against  Paul,  the  whole  history  of  the  Church  would  have 
been  different.  There  would  even  have  been  room  to  doubt  whether 
Paul  was  really  a  disciple  of  Jesus;  for  if  he  was,  how  could  he  come 
to  differ  so  radically  from  those  whom  Jesus  had  taught?  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  however,  these  dire  consequences  were  avoided. 
When  the  issue  was  made  between  Paul  and  the  Judaizers,  the 
original  apostles  decided  whole-heartedly  for  Paul.  The  unity 
of  the  Church  was  preserved.  God  was  guiding  the  deliberations 
of  the  council. 

1.     THE  ACTS  AND  GALATIANS 

The  treatment  of  to-day's  lesson  in  the  Student's  Text  Book  is 
based  upon  the  assumption  that  Gal.  2  :  1-10  is  an  account  of  the 
same  visit  of  Paul  to  Jerusalem  as  the  visit  which  is  described  in 
Acts  15  :  1-29.  That  assumption  is  not  universally  accepted. 
Some  scholars  identify  the  event  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10,  not  with  the 
Apostolic  Council  of  Acts  15  :  1-29,  but  with  the  "famine  visit" 
of  Acts  11  :30;  12  :  25.  Indeed,  some  maintain  that  the  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians  not  only  contains  no  account  of  the  Apostolic 
Council,  but  was  actually  written  before  the  council  was  held — 
say  at  Antioch,  soon  after  the  first  missionary  journey.  Of  course 
this  early  dating  of  Galatians  can  be  adopted  only  in  connection 
with  the  "South  Galatian  theory";  for  according  to  the  "North 
Galatian  theory"  the  churches  addressed  in  the  epistle  were  not 
founded  until  after  the  council,  namely  at  the  time  of  Acts  16  : 6. 

Undoubtedly  the  identification  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10  with  Acts  11  :  30; 
12  :  25,  avoids  some  difficulties.  If  Gal.  2  :  1-10  be  identified 
with  Acts  15  :  1-29,  then  Paul  in  Galatians  has  passed  over  the 
famine  visit  without  mention.  Furthermore  there  are  considerable 
differences  between  Gal.  2  :  1-10  and  Acts  15  :  1-29.     For  example, 

Sen.  T.  ITT.  2.  3j 


82  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

if  Paul  is  referring  to  the  Apostolic  Council,  why  has  he  not  men- 
tioned the  apostolic  decree  of  Acts  15  :  23-29?  These  difficulties, 
however,  are  not  insuperable,  and  there  are  counter  difficulties 
against  the  identification  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10  with  the  famine  visit. 

One  such  difficulty  is  connected  with  chronology.  Paul  says 
that  his  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  took  place  three  years  after  his 
conversion,  Gal.  1  :  18,  and — according  to  the  most  natural  in- 
terpretation of  Gal.  2  :  1 — that  the  visit  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10  took  place 
fourteen  years  after  the  first  visit.  The  conversion  then  occurred 
seventeen  years  before  the  time  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10.  But  if  Gal.  2  :  1-10 
describes  the  famine  visit,  then  the  time  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10  could  not 
have  been  after  about  A.  D.  46.  Counting  back  seventeen  years 
from  A.  D.  46  we  should  get  A.  D.  29  as  the  date  of  the  conversion, 
which  is,  of  course,  too  early. 

This  reasoning,  it  must  be  admitted,  is  not  quite  conclusive. 
The  ancients  had  an  inclusive  method  of  reckoning  time.  Accord- 
ing to  this  method  three  years  after  1914  would  be  1916.  Hence, 
fourteen  plus  three  might  be  only  what  we  should  call  about  fifteen 
years,  instead  of  seventeen.  Furthermore,  Paul  may  mean  in 
Gal.  2  :  1  that  his  conference  with  the  apostles  took  place  fourteen 
years  after  the  conversion  rather  than  fourteen  years  after  the 
first  visit. 

The  identification  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10  with  the  famine  visit  is  not 
impossible.  But  on  the  whole  the  usual  view,  which  identifies  the 
event  of  Gal.  2  :  1-10  with  the  meeting  at  the  time  of  the  Apostolic 
Council  of  Acts  15  :  1-29,  must  be  regarded  as  more  probable. 
The  Apostolic  Council  probably  took  place  roughly  at  about  A.  D. 
49.  The  conversion  of  Paul  then  should  probably  be  put  at  about 
A.  D.  32-34. 

2.     THE  JUDAIZERS 

Conceivably  the  question  about  the  freedom  of  the  Gentiles 
from  the  law  might  have  arisen  at  an  earlier  time;  for  Gentiles  had 
already  been  received  into  the  Church  before  the  first  missionary 
journey.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  indeed,  some  objection  had  been 
raised  to  the  reception  of  Cornelius.  But  that  objection  had  easily 
been  silenced  by  an  appeal  to  the  immediate  guidance  of  God. 
Perhaps  the  case  of  Cornelius  could  be  regarded  as  exceptional; 
and  a  similar  reflection  might  possibly  have  been  applied  to  the 
Gentile  Christians  at  Antioch.  There  seemed  to  be  no  danger,  at 
any  rate,  that  the  predominantly  Jewish  character  of  the  Church 
would  be  lost.     Now,  however,  after  a  regular  Gentile  mission  had 


THE  COUNCIL  AT  JERUSALEM  83 

been  carried  on  with  signal  success,  the  situation  was  materially 
altered.  Evidently  the  influx  of  Gentile  converts,  if  allowed  to 
go  on  unhindered,  would  change  the  whole  character  of  the  Church. 
Christianity  would  appear  altogether  as  a  new  dispensation:  the 
prerogatives  of  Israel  would  be  gone.  The  question  of  Gentile 
Christianity  had  existed  before,  but  after  the  first  missionary  jour- 
ney it  became  acute. 

Perhaps,  however,  there  was  also  another  reason  why  the  battle 
had  not  been  fought  out  at  an  earlier  time.  It  looks  very  much 
as  though  this  bitter  opposition  to  the  Gentile  mission  had  arisen 
only  through  the  appearance  of  a  new  element  in  the  Jerusalem 
church.  Were  these  extreme  legalists,  who  objected  to  the  work 
of  Paul  and  Barnabas — were  these  men  present  in  the  Church  from 
the  beginning?  The  question  is  more  than  doubtful.  It  is  more 
probable  that  these  legalists  came  into  the  Church  during  the 
period  of  prosperity  which  followed  upon  the  persecution  of  Stephen 
and  was  only  briefly  interrupted  by  the  persecution  under  Herod 
Agrippa  I. 

These  Jewish  Christian  opponents  of  the  Gentile  mission — these 
"Judaizers" — must  be  examined  with  some  care.  They  are  de- 
scribed not  only  by  Luke  in  The  Acts  but  by  Paul  himself  in  Gala- 
tians.  According  to  The  Acts,  some  of  them  at  least  had 
belonged  to  the  sect  of  the  Pharisees  before  they  had  become 
Christians.     Acts  15  :  5. 

The  activity  of  the  Judaizers  is  described  by  Luke  in  complete 
independence  of  the  account  given  by  Paul.  As  usual,  Luke 
contents  himself  with  a  record  of  external  fact,  while  Paul  uncovers 
the  deeper  motives  of  the  Judaizers'  actions.  Yet  the  facts  as 
reported  by  Luke  fully  justify  the  harsh  words  which  Paul  employs. 
According  to  Paul,  these  Judaizers  were  "false  brethren  privily 
brought  in,  who  came  in  privily  to  spy  out  our  liberty  which  we 
have  in  Christ  Jesus,  that  they  might  bring  us  into  bondage." 
Gal.  2:4.  By  calling  them  "false  brethren"  Paul  means  simply 
that  they  had  not  really  grasped  the  fundamental  principle  of  the 
gospel — the  principle  of  justification  by  faith.  They  were  still 
trying  to  earn  their  salvation  by  their  works  instead  of  receiving 
it  as  a  gift  of  God.  At  heart  they  were  still  Jews  rather  than 
Christians.  They  came  in  privily  into  places  where  they  did  not 
belong — perhaps  Paul  means  especially  into  the  church  at  Antioch — 
in  order  to  spy  out  Christian  liberty.  Gal.  2  : 4.  Compare  Acts 
15  :1. 


84  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

The  rise  of  this  Judaizing  party  is  easy  to  understand.  In  some 
respects  the  Judaizers  were  simply  following  the  line  of  least  re- 
sistance. By  upholding  the  Mosaic  law  they  would  escape  persecu- 
tion and  even  obtain  honor.  We  have  seen  that  it  was  the  Jews 
who  instigated  the  early  persecutions  of  the  Church.  Such  persecu- 
tions would  be  avoided  by  the  Judaizers,  for  they  could  say  to  their 
non-Christian  countrymen:  "We  are  engaged  simply  in  one  form 
of  the  world-wide  Jewish  mission.  We  are  requiring  our  converts 
to  keep  the  Mosaic  law  and  unite  themselves  definitely  with  the 
people  of  Israel.  Every  convert  that  we  gain  is  a  convert  to 
Judaism.  The  cross  of  Christ  that  we  proclaim  is  supplementary 
to  the  law,  not  subversive  of  it.  We  deserve  therefore  from 
the  Jews  not  persecution  but  honor."  Compare  what  Paul  says 
about  the  Judaizers  in  Galatia.     Gal.  6  :  12,  13. 

3.     THE  APOSTOLIC  DECREE 

At  first  sight  it  seems  rather  strange  that  Paul  in  Galatians  does 
not  mention  the  apostolic  decree.  Some  have  supposed  that  his 
words  even  exclude  any  decree  of  that  sort.  In  Gal.  2  :  6  Paul 
says  that  the  pillars  of  the  Jerusalem  church  "imparted  nothing" 
to  him.  Yet  according  to  The  Acts  they  imparted  to  him  this 
decree.  The  decree,  moreover,  seems  to  have  a  direct  bearing  upon 
the  question  that  Paul  was  discussing  in  Galatians;  for  it  involved 
the  imposition  of  a  part  of  the  ceremonial  law  upon  Gentile  Chris- 
tians. How  then,  if  the  decree  really  was  passed  as  Luke  says  it 
was,  could  it  have  been  left  unmentioned  by  Paul? 

There  are  various  ways  of  overcoming  the  difficulty.  In  the 
first  place  it  is  not  perfectly  certain  that  any  of  the  prohibitions 
contained  in  the  decree  are  ceremonial  in  character.  Three  of 
them  are  probably  ceremonial  if  the  text  of  most  manuscripts  of 
The  Acts  is  correct.  Most  manuscripts  read,  at  Acts  15  :  29: 
"That  ye  abstain  from  things  sacrificed  to  idols,  and  from  blood, 
and  from  things  strangled,  and  from  fornication;  from  which  if 
ye  keep  yourselves,  it  shall  be  well  with  you."  Here  "things 
offered  to  idols"  apparently  describes  not  idolatrous  worship,  but 
food  which  had  been  dedicated  to  idols;  and  "blood"  describes  meat 
used  for  food  without  previous  removal  of  the  blood.  This  meaning 
of  "blood"  is  apparently  fixed  by  the  addition  of  "things  strangled." 
Since  "things  strangled"  evidently  refers  to  food,  probably  the  two 
preceding  expressions  refer  to  food  also.  According  to  the  great 
mass  of  our  witnesses  to  the  text,  therefore,  the  apostolic  decree 


THE  COUNCIL  AT  JERUSALEM  85 

contains  a  food  law.  A  few  witnesses,  however,  omit  all  reference 
to  things  strangled,  not  only  at  Acts  15  :  29  but  also  at  v.  20  and 
at  ch.  21  :  25.  If  this  text  be  original,  then  it  is  possible  to  interpret 
the  prohibitions  as  simply  moral  and  not  at  all  ceremonial  in 
character.  "Things  offered  to  idols"  may  be  interpreted  simply 
of  idolatry,  and  "blood"  of  murder.  But  if  the  prohibitions  are 
prohibitions  of  immorality,  then  they  cannot  be  said  to  have 
"imparted"  anything  to  Paul;  for  of  course  he  was  as  much  opposed 
to  immorality  as  anyone. 

However,  the  more  familiar  form  of  the  text  is  probably  correct. 
The  witnesses  that  omit  the  word  "strangled"  are  those  that 
attest  the  so-called  "Western  Text"  of  The  Acts.  This  Western 
Text  differs  rather  strikingly  from  the  more  familiar  text  in  many 
places.  The  question  as  to  how  far  the  Western  Text  of  The  Acts 
is  correct  is  a  hotly  debated  question.  On  the  whole,  however, 
the  Western  readings  are  usually  at  any  rate  to  be  discredited. 

In  the  second  place,  the  difficulty  about  the  decree  may  be  over- 
come by  regarding  Gal.  2  : 1-10  as  parallel  not  with  Acts  15  : 1-29 
but  with  Acts  11  :30;  12  :  25.  This  solution  has  already  been 
discussed. 

In  the  third  place,  the  difficulty  may  be  overcome  by  that  in- 
terpretation of  the  decree  which  is  proposed  in  the  Student's 
Text  Book.  The  decree  was  not  an  addition  to  Paul's  gospel.  It 
was  not  imposed  upon  the  Gentile  Christians  as  though  a  part  of 
the  law  were  necessary  to  salvation.  On  the  contrary  it  was  simply 
an  attempt  to  solve  the  practical  problems  of  certain  mixed  churches 
— not  the  Pauline  churches  in  general,  but  churches  which  stood 
in  an  especially  close  relation  to  Jerusalem.  This  intrepretation 
of  the  decree  is  favored  by  the  difficult  verse,  Acts  15  :  21.  What 
James  there  means  is  probably  that  the  Gentile  Christians  should 
avoid  those  things  which  would  give  the  most  serious  offense  to 
hearers  of  the  law. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  125-166.  Lightfoot,  "Saint  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,"  pp. 
123-128  ("The  later  visit  of  St.  Paul  to  Jerusalem"),  292-374  ("St.  Paul 
and  the  Three").  Ramsay,  "St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman 
Citizen,"  pp.  48-60,  152-175.  Lewin,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,"  ch.  ix.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,"  ch.  vii.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  St.  Paul,"  pp.  108-118.  Lumby, 
pp.  185-200.  Cook,  pp.  451-458.  Plumptre,  pp.  93-101.  Rackham, 
pp.   238-259,   263-270. 


LESSON  XVI 
THE  GOSPEL  CARRIED  INTO  EUROPE 


From  the  rich  store  of  to-day's  lesson  only  a  few  points  can  be 
selected  for  special  comment. 

1.     TITUS  AND  TIMOTHY 

At  Lystra,  Paul  had  Timothy  circumcised.  Acts  16  : 3.  This 
action  has  been  considered  strange  in  view  of  the  attitude  which 
Paul  had  previously  assumed.  At  Jerusalem,  only  a  short  time 
before,  he  had  absolutely  refused  to  permit  the  circumcision  of 
Titus.  Evidently,  too,  he  had  regarded  the  matter  as  of  fundamental 
importance.  Had  Titus  been  circumcised,  the  freedom  of  the  Gen- 
tile Christians  would  have  been  seriously  endangered. 

The  presence  of  Titus  at  the  Apostolic  Council  is  mentioned  only 
by  Paul  in  Galatians.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  The  Acts.  Indeed, 
Titus  does  not  appear  in  The  Acts  at  all,  though  in  the  epistles 
he  is  rather  prominent.  This  fact,  however,  really  requires  no 
further  explanation  than  that  the  history  of  Luke  is  not  intended 
to  be  exhaustive.  The  restraint  exercised  by  the  author  of  The 
Acts  has  already  been  observed,  for  example,  in  a  comparison  of  the 
long  list  of  hardships  in  II  Cor.  11  :  23-27  with  what  Luke  actually 
narrates.  The  helpers  of  Paul  whom  Luke  mentions  are  usually 
those  who  traveled  with  him.  Titus  was  sent  by  Paul  on  at 
least  one  important  mission,  II  Cor.  7  :  13,  14,  but  was  apparently 
not  his  companion  on  the  missionary  journeys.  Luke  does  not 
concern  himself  very  much  with  the  internal  affairs  of  the  churches, 
and  it  is  in  this  field  that  Titus  is  especially  prominent  in  the 
epistles.  With  regard  to  the  presence  of  Titus  in  Jerusalem,  the 
different  purposes  of  the  narratives  in  Galatians  and  in  The  Acts 
must  be  borne  in  mind.  The  non-circumcision  of  Titus,  so  strongly 
emphasized  by  Paul,  was  merely  preliminary  to  the  public  action 
of  the  church  in  which  Luke  was  interested.  Luke  has  thought 
it  sufficient  to  include  Titus  under  the  "certain  other"  of  the 
Antioch  Christians  who  went  up  with  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  Je- 
rusalem. 

The  different  policy  which  Paul  adopted  in  the  case  of  Timothy, 

86 


THE  GOSPEL  CARRIED  INTO  EUROPE  87 

as  compared  with  his  policy  about  Titus,  is  amply  explained  by 
the  wide  differences  in  the  situation. 

In  the  first  place,  when  Titus  was  at  Jerusalem,  the  matter  of 
Gentile  freedom  was  in  dispute,  whereas  when  Timothy  was 
circumcised  the  question  had  already  been  settled  by  a  formal 
pronouncement  of  the  Jerusalem  church.  After  Paul  had  won  the 
victory  of  principle,  he  could  afford  to  make  concessions  where  no 
principle  was  involved.  Timothy  was  recognized  as  a  full  member 
of  the  Church  even  before  his  circumcision.  Circumcision  was 
merely  intended  to  make  him  a  more  efficient  helper  in  work  among 
the  Jews. 

In  the  second  place — and  this  is  even  more  important — Timothy 
was  a  half -Jew.  It  is  perhaps  doubtful  whether  Paul  under  any 
circumstances  would  have  authorized  the  circumcision  of  a  pure 
Gentile  like  Titus.  But  Timothy's  mother  was  Jewish.  It  must 
always  be  borne  in  mind  that  Paul  did  not  demand  the  relinquish- 
ment of  the  law  on  the  part  of  Jews;  and  Timothy's  parentage  gave 
him  at  least  the  right  of  regarding  himself  as  a  Jew.  If  he  had 
chosen  to  follow  his  Gentile  father,  the  Jews  could  have  regarded 
him  as  a  renegade.  His  usefulness  in  the  synagogues  would  have 
been  lost.  Obviously  the  circumcision  of  such  a  man  involved 
nothing  more  than  the  maintenance  of  ancestral  custom  on  the 
part  of  Jews.  Where  no  principle  was  involved,  Paul  was  the  most 
concessive  of  men.  See  especially  I  Cor.  9  :  19-23.  The  final 
relinquishment  of  the  law  on  the  part  of  Jews  was  rightly  left  to 
the  future  guidance  of  God. 

2.     THE  ROUTE  THROUGH  ASIA  MINOR 

The  difficulty  of  tracing  the  route  of  the  missionaries  beyond 
Lystra  is  due  largely  to  the  difficulty  of  Acts  16  :  6.  A  literal 
translation  of  the  decisive  words  in  that  verse  would  be  either  "the 
Phrygian  and  Galatian  country"  or  "Phrygia  and  the  Galatian 
country."  According  to  the  advocates  of  the  "South  Galatian 
theory,"  "the  Galatian  country"  here  refers  not  to  Galatia  proper 
but  to  the  southern  part  of  the  Roman  province  Galatia.  "The 
Phrygian  and  Galatian  country"  then  perhaps  means  "The  Phrygo- 
Galatic  country,"  or  "that  part  of  Phrygia  which  is  in  the  Roman 
province  Galatia."  The  reference  then  is  to  Iconium,  Pisidian 
Antioch  and  the  surrounding  country — after  the  missionaries  had 
passed  through  the  Lycaonian  part  of  the  province  Galatia  (Derbe 
and  Lystra)  they  traversed  the  Phrygian  part  of  the  province.     The 


88  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

chief  objection  to  all  such  interpretations  is  found  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  verse:  "having  been  forbidden  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  speak 
the  word  in  Asia."  It  looks  as  though  the  reason  why  they  passed 
through  "the  Phrygian  and  Galatian  country"  was  that  they 
were  forbidden  to  preach  in  Asia.  But  South  Galatia  was  directly 
on  the  way  to  Asia.  The  impossibility  of  preaching  in  Asia  could 
therefore  hardly  have  been  the  reason  for  passing  through  south 
Galatia. 

Apparently,  therefore,  the  disputed  phrase  refers  rather  to  some 
region  which  is  not  on  the  way  to  Asia.  This  requirement  is 
satisfied  if  Galatia  proper  is  meant — the  country  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  Roman  province  Galatia.  When  they  got  to  Pisidian 
Antioch,  it  would  have  been  natural  for  them  to  proceed  into  the 
western  part  of  Asia  Minor,  into  "Asia."  That  they  were  forbidden 
to  do.  Hence  they  turned  north,  and  went  through  Phrygia  into 
Galatia  proper.  When  they  got  to  the  border  country  between 
Mysia  and  Galatia  proper,  they  tried  to  continue  their  journey 
north  into  Bithynia,  but  were  prevented  by  the  Spirit.  Then 
they  turned  west,  and  passing  through  Mysia  without  preaching 
arrived  at  last  at  the  coast,  at  Troas. 

Nothing  is  said  here  about  preaching  in  Galatia  proper.  But  in 
Acts  18  :  23,  in  connection  with  the  third  missionary  journey,  it  is 
said  that  when  Paul  passed  through  "the  Galatian  country  and 
Phrygia"  he  established  the  disciples.  There  could  not  have  been 
disciples  in  the  "Galatian  country,"  unless  there  had  been  preaching 
there  on  the  previous  journey.  On  the  "North  Galatian"  theory, 
therefore,  the  founding  of  the  Galatian  churches  to  which  the 
epistle  is  directed  is  to  be  placed  at  Acts  16  :  6,  and  the  second 
visit  to  them,  which  seems  to  be  presupposed  by  the  epistle,  is 
to  be  put  at  Acts  18  :  23.  If  it  seems  strange  that  Luke  does  not 
mention  the  founding  of  these  churches,  the  hurried  character  of 
this  section  of  the  narrative  must  be  borne  in  mind.  Furthermore, 
the  epistle  seems  to  imply  that  the  founding  of  the  churches  was 
rather  incidental  than  an  original  purpose  of  the  journey;  for  in 
Gal.  4  :  13  Paul  says  that  it  was  because  of  an  infirmity  of  the  flesh 
that  he  preached  the  gospel  in  Galatia  the  former  time.  Apparently 
he  had  been  hurrying  through  the  country  without  stopping,  but 
being  detained  by  illness  used  his  enforced  leisure  to  preach  to  the 
inhabitants.  It  is  not  impossible  to  understand  how  Luke  came  to 
omit  mention  of  such  incidental  preaching.  On  the  second  mis- 
sionary journey  attention  is  concentrated  on  Macedonia  and  Greece. 


THE  GOSPEL  CARRIED  INTO  EUROPE  89 

3.     THE  MOVEMENTS  OF  SILAS  AND  TIMOTHY 

When  Paul  went  to  Athens,  Silas  and  Timothy  remained  behind 
in  Macedonia.  Acts  17  :  14.  They  were  directed  to  join  Paul 
again  as  soon  as  possible.  V.  15.  In  Acts  18  :  1,  5  they  are  said 
to  have  joined  him  at  Corinth.  The  narrative  in  The  Acts  must 
here  be  supplemented  by  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians. 
What  Luke  says  is  perfectly  true,  but  his  narrative  is  not  complete. 
According  to  the  most  natural  interpretation  of  I  Thess.  3  :  1-5, 
Timothy  was  with  Paul  in  Athens,  and  from  there  was  sent  to 
Thessalonica.  The  entire  course  of  events  was  perhaps  as  follows : 
Silas  and  Timothy  both  joined  Paul  quickly  at  Athens  according 
to  directions.  They  were  then  sent  away  again — Timothy  to 
Thessalonica,  and  Silas  to  some  other  place  in  Macedonia.  Then, 
after  the  execution  of  their  commissions,  they  finally  joined  Paul 
again  at  Corinth.  Acts  18  :  5;  I  Thess.  3  :  6.  Soon  afterwards, 
all  three  missionaries  were  associated  in  the  address  of  First  Thessa- 
lonians. 

4.     PAUL  AT  ATHENS 

In  Athens  Paul  preached  as  usual  in  the  synagogue  to  Jews  and 
"God-fearers";  but  he  also  adopted  another  and  more  unusual 
method — he  simply  took  his  stand  without  introduction  in  the 
market  place,  and  spoke  to  those  who  chanced  by.  This  method 
was  characteristically  Greek ;  it  reminds  us  of  the  days  of  Socrates. 

In  the  market  place,  Paul  encountered  certain  of  the  Epicurean 
and  Stoic  philosophers.  Both  of  these  schools  of  philosophy  had 
originated  almost  three  hundred  years  before  Christ,  and  both 
were  prominent  in  the  New  Testament  period.  In  their  tenets  they 
were  very  different.  The  Stoics  were  pantheists.  They  conceived 
of  the  world  as  a  sort  of  great  living  being  of  which  God  is  the  soul. 
The  world  does  not  exist  apart  from  God  and  God  does  not  exist 
apart  from  the  world.  Such  pantheism  is  far  removed  from  the 
Christian  belief  in  the  living  God,  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth; 
but  as  against  polytheism,  pantheism  and  theism  have  something 
in  common.  Paul  in  his  speech  was  able  to  start  from  this  common 
ground.  In  ethics,  the  Stoics  were  perhaps  nearer  to  Christianity 
than  in  metaphysics.  The  highest  good  they  conceived  to  be  a 
life  that  is  led  in  accordance  with  reason — that  reason  which  is 
the  determining  principle  of  the  world.  The  passions  must  be 
conquered,  pleasure  is  worthless,  the  wise  man  is  independent  of 
external  conditions.  Such  an  ethic  worked  itself  out  in  practice 
in  many  admirable  virtues — in  some  conception  of  the  universal 


90  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

brotherhood  of  mankind,  in  charity,  in  heroic  self-denial.  But 
it  lacked  the  warmth  and  glow  of  Christian  love,  and  it  lacked  the 
living  God. 

The  Epicureans  were  materialists.  The  world,  for  them,  was 
a  vast  mechanism.  They  believed  in  the  gods,  but  conceived  of 
them  as  altogether  without  influence  upon  human  affairs.  Indeed, 
the  deliverance  of  man  from  the  fear  of  the  gods  was  one  of  the 
purposes  of  the  Epicurean  philosophy.  The  Epicureans  were 
interested  chiefly  in  ethics.  Pleasure,  according  to  them,  is  the 
highest  good.  It  need  not  be  the  pleasure  of  the  senses;  indeed 
Epicurus,  at  least,  the  founder  of  the  school,  insisted  upon  a  calm 
life  undisturbed  by  violent  passions.  Nevertheless  it  will  readily 
be  seen  how  little  such  a  philosophy  had  in  common  with  Chris- 
tianity. 

The  conditions  under  which  Paul  made  his  speech  cannot  be 
determined  with  certainty.  The  difficulty  arises  from  the  ambiguity 
of  "Areopagus."  "Areopagus"  means  "Mars'  hill."  But  the 
term  was  also  applied  to  the  court  which  held  at  least  some  of  its 
meetings  on  the  hill.  Which  meaning  is  intended  here?  Did 
Paul  speak  before  the  court,  or  did  he  speak  on  Mars'  hill  merely 
to  those  who  were  interested?  On  the  whole,  it  is  improbable  at 
any  rate  that  he  was  subjected  to  a  formal  trial. 

The  speech  of  Paul  at  Athens  is  one  of  the  three  important 
speeches  of  Paul,  exclusive  of  his  speeches  in  defense  of  himself  at 
Jerusalem  and  at  Csesarea,  which  have  been  recorded  in  The  Acts. 
These  speeches  are  well  chosen.  One  of  them  is  a  speech  to  Jews, 
Acts  13  :  16-41;  one  a  speech  to  Gentiles,  Acts  17  :  22-31;  and  the 
third  a  speech  to  Christians,  Acts  20  :  18-35.  Together  they 
afford  a  very  good  idea  of  Paul's  method  as  a  missionary  and  as  a 
pastor.  As  is  to  be  expected,  they  differ  strikingly  from  one 
another.  Paul  was  large  enough  to  comprehend  the  wonderful 
richness  of  Christian  truth.  His  gospel  was  always  the  same,  but 
he  was  able  to  adapt  the  presentation  of  it  to  the  character  of  his 
hearers. 

At  Athens,  an  altar  inscribed  To  An  Unknown  God  provided  a 
starting  point.  The  existence  of  such  an  altar  is  not  at  all  sur- 
prising, although  only  altars  to  "unknown  gods"  (plural  instead 
of  singular)  are  attested  elsewhere.  Perhaps  the  inscription  on 
this  altar  indicated  simply  that  the  builder  of  the  altar  did  not 
know  to  which  of  the  numberless  gods  he  should  offer  thanks  for 
a  benefit  that  he  had  received,  or  to  which  he  should  address  a 


THE  GOSPEL  CARRIED  INTO  EUROPE  9 1 

prayer  to  ward  off  calamity.  Under  a  polytheistic  religion,  where 
every  department  of  life  had  its  own  god,  it  was  sometimes  difficult 
to  pick  out  the  right  god  to  pray  to  for  any  particular  purpose. 
Such  an  altar  was  at  any  rate  an  expression  of  ignorance,  and  that 
ignorance  served  as  a  starting  point  for  Paul.  "You  are  afraid 
that  you  have  neglected  the  proper  god  in  this  case,"  says  Paul 
in  effect.  "Yes,  indeed,  you  have.  You  have  neglected  a  very 
important  god  indeed,  you  have  neglected  the  one  true  God,  who 
made  the  world  and  all  things  therein." 

In  what  follows,  Paul  appeals  to  the  truth  contained  in  Stoic 
pantheism.  His  words  are  of  peculiar  interest  at  the  present  day, 
when  pantheism  is  rampant  even  within  the  Church.  There  is  a 
great  truth  in  pantheism.  It  emphasizes  the  immanence  of  God. 
But  the  truth  of  pantheism  is  contained  also  in  theism.  The  theist, 
as  well  as  the  pantheist,  believes  that  God  is  not  far  from  every  one 
of  us,  and  that  in  him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being.  The 
theist,  as  well  as  the  pantheist,  can  say,  "Closer  is  he  than  breathing, 
and  nearer  than  hands  and  feet."  The  theist  accepts  all  the  truth 
of  pantheism,  but  avoids  the  error.  God  is  present  in  the  world 
— not  one  sparrow  "shall  fall  on  the  ground  without  your  Father" 
— but  he  is  not  limited  to  the  world.  He  is  not  just  another 
name  for  the  totality  of  things,  but  an  awful,  mysterious,  holy, 
free  and  sovereign  Person.  He  is  present  in  the  world,  but  also 
Master  of  the  world. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  177-197.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on  "Troas," 
"Philippi,"  "Thessalonica,"  "Athens,"  "Areopagus,"  "Stoics,"  "Epicu- 
reans," "Corinth,"  "Gallio,"  "Silas."  Ramsay,  "St.  Paul  the  Traveller 
and  the  Roman  Citizen,"  pp.  175-261;  "Pictures  of  the  Apostolic 
Church,"  pp.  197-239.  Lewin,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul," 
chs.  x,  xi,  and  xii.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of 
St.  Paul,"  chs.  viii,  ix,  x,  xi,  and  xii.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  St.  Paul," 
pp.  71-81.  Lumby,  pp.  200-239.  Cook,  pp.  458-476.  Plumptre, 
pp.  101-124.  Rackham,  pp.  260-263,  271-331.  For  information  about 
the  recently  discovered  Gallio  inscription,  see  "The  Princeton  Theo- 
logical Review,"  vol.  ix,  191 1,  pp.  290-298:  Armstrong,  "Epigraphical 
Note." 


LESSON  XVII 
ENCOURAGEMENT  FOR  RECENT  CONVERTS 


The  Pauline  Epistles  fall  naturally  into  four  groups:  (1)  the 
epistles  of  the  second  missionary  journey  (First  and  Second  Thessa- 
lonians) ;  (2)  the  epistles  of  the  third  missionary  journey  (Galatians, 
First  and  Second  Corinthians  and  Romans) ;  (3)  the  epistles  of  the 
first  imprisonment  (Colossians  and  Philemon,  Ephesians  and 
Philippians) ;  (4)  the  epistles  written  after  the  period  covered  by 
The  Acts  (First  Timothy,  Titus  and  Second  Timothy). 

Each  of  these  groups  has  its  own  characteristics.  The  first  group 
is  characterized  by  simplicity  of  subject  matter,  and  by  a  special 
interest  in  the  second  coming  of  Christ.  The  second  group  is 
concerned  especially  with  the  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace.  The 
third  group  displays  a  special  interest  in  the  person  of  Christ  and 
in  the  Church.  The  fourth  group  deals  with  organization,  and  with 
the  maintenance  of  sound  instruction. 

1.     SIMPLICITY  OF  THE  THESSALONIAN  EPISTLES 

The  reason  for  the  peculiarities  of  First  and  Second  Thessalonians 
has  often  been  sought  in  the  early  date  of  these  epistles.  On  the 
second  missionary  journey,  it  is  said,  Paul  had  not  yet  developed 
the  great  doctrines  which  appear  at  later  periods  of  his  life.  This 
explanation  may  perhaps  contain  an  element  of  truth.  Undoubtedly 
there  was  some  progress  in  Paul's  thinking.  Not  everything  was 
revealed  to  him  at  once.  The  chief  cause,  however,  for  the  sim- 
plicity of  the  Thessalonian  epistles  is  not  the  early  date  but  the 
peculiar  occasion  of  these  epistles.  Paul  is  here  imparting  his  first 
written  instruction  to  an  infant  church.  Naturally  he  must  feed 
these  recent  converts  with  milk.  The  simplicity  of  the  letters 
is  due  not  to  immaturity  in  Paul  but  to  immaturity  in  the  Thessa- 
lonian church.  After  all,  at  the  time  when  the  Thessalonian 
epistles  were  written,  the  major  part  of  Paul's  Christian  life 
— including  the  decisive  conflict  with  the  Judaizers  at  Antioch  and 
Jerusalem — lay  already  in  the  past. 

At  any  rate  the  simplicity  of  the  Thessalonian  epistles  must 
not  be  exaggerated.     In  these  letters  the  great  Pauline  doctrines, 

92 


ENCOURAGEMENT  FOR  RECENT  CONVERTS    93 

though  not  discussed  at  length,  are  everywhere  presupposed. 
There  is  the  same  lofty  conception  of  Christ  as  in  the  other 
epistles,  the  same  emphasis  upon  his  resurrection,  the  same 
doctrine  of  salvation  through  his  death.     I  Thess.  1  :  10;  5:9,  10. 

2.     THE  SECOND  COMING  OF  CHRIST 

Undoubtedly  the  second  advent,  with  the  events  which  are  im- 
mediately to  precede  it,  occupies  a  central  position  in  the  Thessa- 
lonian  epistles.  A  few  words  of  explanation,  therefore,  may  here 
be  in  order. 

Evidently  the  expectation  of  Christ's  coming  was  a  fundamental 
part  of  Paul's  belief,  and  had  a  fundamental  place  in  his  preaching. 
"Ye  turned  unto  God  from  idols,  to  serve  a  living  and  true  God, 
and  to  wait  for  his  Son  from  heaven" — these  words  show  clearly 
how  the  hope  of  Christ's  appearing  was  instilled  in  the  converts 
from  the  very  beginning.  I  Thess.  1  :  9,  10.  To  serve  the  living 
God  and  to  wait  for  his  Son — that  is  the  sum  and  substance  of  the 
Christian  life.  All  through  the  epistles  the  thought  of  the  Parousia 
— the  "presence"  or  "coming" — of  Christ  appears  as  a  master 
motive.     I  Thess.  2  :  19;  3  :  13;  4  :  13  to  5  :  11,  23,  24;  II  Thess. 

I  :  5  to  2  :  12. 

This  emphasis  upon  the  second  coming  of  Christ  is  explained  if 
Paul  expected  Christ  to  come  in  the  near  future.  The  imminence 
of  the  Parousia  for  Paul  appears  to  be  indicated  by  I  Thess.  4  :  15: 
"For  this  we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  we  that 
are  alive,  that  are  left  unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  shall  in  no  wise 
precede  them  that  are  fallen  asleep."  This  verse  is  often  thought 
to  indicate  that  Paul  confidently  expected  before  his  death  to 
witness  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  Apparently  he  classes  himself 
with  those  who  "are  left  unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord"  as  over 
against  those  who  will  suffer  death.  In  the  later  epistles,  it  is 
further  said,  Paul  held  a  very  different  view.  From  Second 
Corinthians  on,  he  faced  ever  more  definitely  the  thought  of  death. 

II  Cor.  5  :  1,  8;  Phil.  1  :  20-26.  A  comparison  of  I  Cor.  15  :  51 
with  II  Cor.  5:1,  8  is  thought  to  indicate  that  the  deadly  peril 
which  Paul  incurred  between  the  writing  of  the  two  Corinthian 
epistles,  II  Cor.  1  :  8,  9,  had  weakened  his  expectation  of  living 
until  Christ  should  come.  After  he  had  once  despaired  of  life, 
he  could  hardly  expect  with  such  perfect  confidence  to  escape  the 
experience  of  death.  The  possibility  of  death  was  too  strong  to  be 
left  completely  out  of  sight. 


94  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

Plausible  as  such  a  view  is,  it  can  be  held  only  with  certain 
reservations. 

In  the  first  place,  we  must  not  exaggerate  the  nearness  of  the 
Parousia  according  to  Paul,  even  in  the  earliest  period;  for  in  II 
Thess.  2  :  1-12  the  Thessalonians  are  reminded  of  certain  events 
that  must  occur  before  Christ  would  come.  The  expression  of  the 
former  epistle,  I  Thess.  5  :  2,  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  would  come 
as  a  thief  in  the  night,  was  to  be  taken  as  a  warning  to  unbelievers 
to  repent  while  there  was  yet  time,  not  as  a  ground  for  neglecting 
ordinary  provision  for  the  future.  In  Second  Thessalonians  Paul 
finds  it  necessary  to  calm  the  overstrained  expectations  of  the 
Thessalonian  Christians. 

Furthermore,  it  is  not  only  in  the  earlier  epistles  that  expressions 
occur  which  seem  to  suggest  that  the  Parousia  is  near.  Rom.  13  : 
11;  Phil.  4  :  5.  And  then  it  is  evident  from  II  Cor.  11  :  23-29  and 
from  I  Cor.  15  :  30-32  that  Paul  had  undergone  dangers  before 
the  one  mentioned  in  II  Cor.  1  :  8,  9,  so  that  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  that  one  event  caused  any  sudden  change  in  his 
expectations. 

Lastly,  in  I  Cor.  6  :  14  Paul  says  that  "God  both  raised  the  Lord, 
and  will  raise  up  us  through  his  power."  If  that  refers  to  the 
literal  resurrection,  then  here  Paul  classes  himself  among  those  who 
are  to  die;  for  if  he  lived  to  the  Parousia,  then  there  would  be  no 
need  for  him  to  be  raised  up. 

It  is  therefore  very  doubtful  whether  we  can  put  any  very  definite 
change  in  the  apostle's  expectations  as  to  his  living  or  dying  between 
First  Corinthians  and  Second  Corinthians.  A  gradual  develop- 
ment in  his  feeling  about  the  matter  there  no  doubt  was.  During 
the  early  part  of  his  life  his  mind  dwelt  less  upon  the  prospect  of 
death  than  it  did  after  perils  of  all  kinds  had  made  that  prospect 
more  and  more  imminent.  But  at  no  time  did  the  apostle  regard 
the  privilege  of  living  until  the  Parousia  as  a  certainty  to  be 
put  at  all  in  the  same  category  with  the  Christian  hope  itself. 
Especially  the  passage  in  First  Thessalonians  can  be  rightly  inter- 
preted only  in  the  light  of  the  historical  occasion  for  it.  Until 
certain  members  of  the  church  had  died,  the  Thessalonian  Christians 
had  never  faced  the  possibility  of  dying  before  the  second  coming 
of  Christ.  Hence  they  were  troubled.  Would  the  brethren  who 
had  fallen  asleep  miss  the  benefits  of  Christ's  kingdom?  Paul 
writes  to  reassure  them.  He  does  not  contradict  their  hope  of 
living  till  the  coming  of  Christ,  for  God  had  not  revealed  to  him  that 


ENCOURAGEMENT  FOR  RECENT  CONVERTS    95 

that  hope  would  not  be  realized.  But  he  tells  them  that,  supposing 
that  hope  to  be  justified,  even  then  they  will  have  no  advantage 
over  their  dead  brethren.  He  classes  himself  with  those  who  were 
still  alive  and  might  therefore  live  till  Christ  should  come,  as  over 
against  those  who  were  already  dead  and  could  not  therefore  live 
till  Christ  should  come. 

Certain  passages  in  the  epistles  of  Paul,  which  are  not  confined 
to  any  one  period  of  his  life,  seem  to  show  that  at  any  rate  he  did 
not  exclude  the  very  real  possibility  that  Christ  might  come  in 
the  near  future.  At  any  rate,  however,  such  an  expectation  of  the 
early  coming  of  Christ  was  just  as  far  removed  as  possible  from 
the  expectations  of  fanatical  chiliasts.  It  did  not  lead  Paul  to 
forget  that  the  times  and  the  seasons  are  entirely  in  the  hand  of 
God.  It  had  no  appreciable  effect  upon  his  ethics,  except  to  make 
it  more  intense,  more  fully  governed  by  the  thought  of  the  judgment 
seat  of  Christ.  It  did  not  prevent  him  from  laying  far-reaching 
plans,  it  did  not  prevent  his  developing  a  great  philosophy  of 
future  history  in  Rom.,  chs.  9  to  11.  How  far  he  was  from  falling 
into  the  error  he  combated  in  Second  Thessalonians!  Despite  his 
view  of  the  temporary  character  of  the  things  that  are  seen,  how 
sane  and  healthy  was  his  way  of  dealing  with  practical  problems! 
He  did  his  duty,  and  left  the  details  of  the  future  to  God.  Hence 
it  is  hard  to  discover  what  Paul  thought  as  to  how  soon  Christ 
would  come — naturally  so,  for  Paul  did  not  try  to  discover  it  himself. 

3.     THE  PERSONS  ASSOCIATED  IN  THE  ADDRESS 

Almost  always  other  persons  are  associated  with  Paul  in  the 
addresses  of  the  epistles.  With  regard  to  the  meaning  of  this  custom, 
extreme  views  should  be  avoided.  On  the  one  hand,  these  persons — 
usually,  at  any  rate — had  no  share  in  the  actual  composition  of  the 
epistles.  The  epistles  bear  the  imprint  of  one  striking  personality. 
On  the  other  hand,  association  in  the  address  means  something 
more  than  that  the  persons  so  named  sent  greetings;  for  mere 
greetings  are  placed  at  the  end.  The  truth  lies  between  the  two 
extremes.  Probably  the  persons  associated  with  Paul  in  the  address 
were  made  acquainted  at  least  in  general  with  the  contents  of  the 
epistles,  and  desired  to  express  their  agreement  with  what  was  said. 
In  the  Thessalonian  epistles  Silas  and  Timothy,  who  had  had  a 
part  in  the  founding  of  the  Thessalonian  church,  appear  very 
appropriately  in  the  address. 

A  question  related   to  that  of  the  persons  associated  in  the 


96  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

addresses  is  the  question  of  the  so-called  "epistolary  plural." 
The  epistolary  plural  was  analogous  to  our  "editorial  we"  it  was 
a  usage  by  which  the  writer  of  a  letter  could  substitute  "we"  for 
"I"  in  referring  to  himself  alone.  In  many  passages  in  the  letters 
of  Paul  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  tell  whether  a  plural  is  merely 
epistolary,  or  whether  it  has  some  special  significance.  For 
example,  whom,  if  anyone,  is  Paul  including  with  himself  in  the 
"we"  of  I  Thess.  3:1?  In  particular,  the  question  often  is 
whether,  when  Paul  says  "we,"  he  is  thinking  of  the  persons  who 
were  associated  with  him  in  the  address  of  the  epistle.  On  the 
whole  it  seems  impossible  to  deny  that  Paul  sometimes  uses  the 
epistolary  plural,  though  his  use  of  it  is  probably  not  so  extensive 
as  has  often  been  supposed. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  197-203.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  (supplemented), 
article  on  "Thessalonians,  Epistles  to  the."  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of 
the  Bible":  Lock,  articles  on  "Thessalonians,  First  Epistle  to  the"  and 
"Thessalonians,  Second  Epistle  to  the."  M'Clymont,  "The  New 
Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  47-57.  Ramsay,  "Pictures  of  the 
Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  240-246.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  St.  Paul," 
pp.  85-107.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English 
Readers,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  125-170:  Mason,  "The  Epistles  of  Paul  the 
Apostle  to  the  Thessalonians."  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and 
Colleges":  Findlay,  "The  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians."  Zahn,  "In- 
troduction to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  i,  pp.  152-164,  203-255. 
Milligan,  "St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians."  The  two  last- 
named  works  are  intended  primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowl- 
edge of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XVIII 
THE  CONFLICT  WITH  THE  JUDAIZERS 


1.     APOLLOS 

Before  the  arrival  of  Paul  at  Ephesus  an  important  event  had 
taken  place  in  that  city — the  meeting  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla  with 
Apollos.  Apollos  was  a  Jew  of  Alexandrian  descent.  He  had  already- 
received  instruction  about  Jesus — perhaps  in  his  native  city.  Of  all 
the  great  cities  of  the  Roman  Empire  Alexandria  alone  was  approxi- 
mately as  near  to  Jerusalem  as  was  Syrian  Antioch.  The  founding 
of  the  church  at  Alexandria  is  obscure,  but  undoubtedly  it  took 
place  at  a  very  early  time.  At  a  later  period  Alexandria  was  of  the 
utmost  importance  as  the  center  of  Christian  learning,  as  it  had 
been  already  the  center  of  the  learning  of  the  pagan  world.  Until 
instructed  by  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  Apollos  had  known  only  the 
baptism  of  John  the  Baptist.  Apparently  one  important  thing  that 
he  had  lacked  was  an  acquaintance  with  the  peculiar  Christian 
manifestation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  seems  to  have  been  trained 
in  Greek  rhetoric,  whether  the  word  translated  "eloquent"  in  Acts 
18  :  24  means  "eloquent"  or  "learned."  Apollos  did  not  remain 
long  in  Ephesus,  but  went  to  Corinth,  where,  as  can  be  learned 
from  First  Corinthians  as  well  as  from  The  Acts,  his  work  was  of 
great  importance. 

2.     GALATIANS  A  POLEMIC 

After  studying  first  the  Thessalonian  epistles  and  then  Galatians 
in  succession  the  student  should  be  able  to  form  some  conception 
of  the  variety  among  the  epistles  of  Paul.  Certainly  there  could 
be  no  sharper  contrast.  First  and  Second  Thessalonians  are  simple, 
affectionate  letters  written  to  a  youthful  church ;  Galatians  is  one  of 
the  most  passionate  bits  of  polemic  in  the  whole  Bible.  We  ought 
to  honor  Paul  for  his  anger.  A  lesser  man  might  have  taken  a  calmer 
view  of  the  situation.  After  all,  it  might  have  been  said,  the 
observance  of  Jewish  fasts  and  feasts  was  not  a  serious  matter; 
even  circumcision,  though  useless,  could  do  no  great  harm.  But 
Paul  penetrated  below  the  surface.  He  detected  the  great  principles 
that  were  at  stake.    The  Judaizers  were  disannulling  the  grace  of  God. 

Sen.  T.  III.  2.  gy 


98  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

3.     THE  ADDRESS.     GAL.  1  :  1-5 

The  addresses  of  the  Pauline  epistles  are  never  merely  formal. 
Paul  does  not  wait  for  the  beginning  of  the  letter  proper  in  order 
to  say  what  he  has  in  mind.  Even  the  epistolary  forms  are  suffused 
with  the  deepest  religious  feeling. 

The  opening  of  the  present  letter  is  anticipatory  of  what  is  to 
follow.  Dividing  the  opening  into  three  parts — the  nominative 
(name  and  title  of  the  writer),  the  dative  (name  of  those  to  whom 
the  letter  is  addressed),  and  the  greeting — it  will  be  observed  that 
every  one  of  these  parts  has  its  peculiarity  as  compared  with  the 
other  Pauline  epistles. 

The  peculiarity  of  the  nominative  is  the  remarkable  addition 
beginning  with  "not  from  men,"  which  is  a  summary  of  the  first 
great  division  of  the  epistle,  Paul's  defense  against  the  personal  attack 
of  his  opponents.  Since  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  is  polemic  from 
beginning  to  end,  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  very  first  word  after 
the  bare  name  and  title  of  the  author  is  "not."  Paul  cannot  mention 
his  title  "apostle" — in  the  addresses  of  First  and  Second  Thessa- 
lonians  he  had  not  thought  it  necessary  to  mention  it  at  all — 
without  thinking  of  the  way  in  which  in  Galatia  it  was  misrepre- 
sented. "My  apostleship,"  he  says,  "came  not  only  from  Christ, 
but  directly  from  Christ." 

The  peculiarity  of  the  dative  is  its  brevity — not  "beloved  of  God, 
called  to  be  saints,"  or  the  like,  but  just  the  bare  and  formal  "to 
the  churches  of  Galatia."  The  situation  was  not  one  which  called 
for  pleasant  words! 

The  greeting  is  the  least  varied  part  in  the  addresses  of  the 
Pauline  epistles.  The  long  addition  to  the  greeting  in  Galatians 
is  absolutely  unique.  It  is  a  summary  of  the  second  and  central 
main  division  of  the  epistle,  Paul's  defense  of  his  gospel.  "Christ 
has  died  to  free  you.  The  Judaizers  in  bringing  you  into  bondage 
are  making  of  none  effect  the  grace  of  Christ,  manifested  on  the 
cross."  That  is  the  very  core  of  the  letter.  In  all  of  the  Pauline 
epistles  there  is  scarcely  a  passage  more  characteristic  of  the  man 
than  the  first  five  verses  of  Galatians.  An  ordinary  writer  would 
have  been  merely  formal  in  the  address.      Not  so  Paul! 

The  exultant  supernaturalism  of  the  address  should  be  noticed. 
This  supernaturalism  appears,  in  the  first  place,  in  the  sphere  of 
external  history — "God  the  Father,  who  raised  him  from  the  dead." 
Pauline  Christianity  is  based  upon  the  miracle  of  the  resurrection. 
Supernaturalism  appears  also,  however,  in  the  sphere  of  Christian 


THE  CONFLICT  WITH  THE  JUDAIZERS  99 

experience— "who  gave  himself  for  our  sins,  that  he  might  deliver 
us  out  of  this  present  evil  world."  Christianity  is  no  mere  easy 
development  of  the  old  life,  no  mere  improvement  of  the  life,  but 
a  new  life  in  a  new  world.  In  both  spheres,  supernaturalism  is 
being  denied  in  the  modern  Church.  Pauline  Christianity  is  very 
different  from  much  that  is  called  Christianity  to-day. 

Finally,  this  passage  will  serve  to  exhibit  Paul's  lofty  view  of  the 
person  of  Christ.  "Neither  through  man,"  says  Paul,  "but  through 
Jesus  Christ."  Jesus  Christ  is  here  distinguished  sharply  from 
men  and  placed  clearly  on  the  side  of  God.  What  is  more,  even 
the  Judaizers  evidently  accepted  fundamentally  the  same  view. 
Paul  said,  "Not  by  man,  but  by  Jesus  Christ";  the  Judaizers  said, 
"Not  by  Jesus  Christ,  but  by  man."  But  if  so,  then  the  Judaizers, 
no  less  than  Paul,  distinguished  Jesus  sharply  from  ordinary 
humanity.  About  other  things  there  was  debate,  but  about  the 
person  of  Christ  Paul  appears  in  harmony  even  with  his  opponents. 
Evidently  the  original  apostles  had  given  the  Judaizers  on  this  point 
no  slightest  excuse  for  differing  from  Paul.  The  heavenly  Christ  of 
Paul  was  also  the  Christ  of  those  who  had  walked  and  talked  with 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.  They  had  seen  Jesus  subject  to  all  the  petty 
limitations  of  human  life.  Yet  they  thought  him  divine!  Could 
they  have  been  deceived? 

4.     THE  PURPOSE  OF  THE  EPISTLE.     GAL.  1  :  6-10 

The  thanksgiving  for  the  Christian  state  of  the  readers,  which 
appears  in  practically  every  other  of  the  Pauline  epistles,  is  here 
conspicuous  by  its  absence.  Here  it  would  have  been  a  mockery. 
The  Galatians  were  on  the  point  of  giving  up  the  gospel.  There 
was  just  a  chance  of  saving  them.  The  letter  was  written  in  a 
desperate  crisis.  Pray  God  it  might  not  be  too  late!  No  time  here 
for  words  of  thanks! 

In  vs.  6-10,  Paul  simply  states  the  purpose  of  the  letter  in  a  few 
uncompromising  words:  "You  are  falling  away  from  the  gospel 
and  I  am  writing  to  stop  you." 

5.     PAUL'S  DEFENSE  OF  HIS  APOSTOLIC  AUTHORITY.     GAL. 
1  :  11  to  2  :  21 

After  stating,  Gal.  1  :  11,  12,  the  thesis  that  is  to  be  proved  in 
this  section,  Paul  defends  his  independent  apostolic  authority  by 
three  main  arguments. 

In  the  first  place,  vs.  13-24,  he  was  already  launched  upon  his 


100  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

work  as  apostle  to  the  Gentiles  before  he  had  even  come  into  any 
effective  contact  with  the  original  apostles.  Before  his  conversion, 
he  had  been  an  active  persecutor.  His  conversion  was  wrought, 
not,  like  an  ordinary  conversion,  through  human  agency,  but  by 
an  immediate  act  of  Christ.  After  his  conversion  it  was  three 
years  before  he  saw  any  of  the  apostles.  Then  he  saw  only  Peter 
(and  James)  and  that  not  long  enough  to  become,  as  his  opponents 
said,  a  disciple  of  these  leaders. 

In  the  second  place,  Gal.  2  :  1-10,  when  he  finally  did  hold  a 
conference  with  the  original  apostles,  they  themselves,  the  very 
authorities  to  whom  the  Judaizers  appealed,  recognized  that  his 
authority  was  quite  independent  of  theirs,  and,  like  theirs,  of 
directly  divine  origin. 

In  the  third  place,  Gal.  2  :  11-21,  so  independent  was  his 
authority  that  on  one  occasion  he  could  even  rebuke  the  chief  of 
the  original  apostles  himself.  What  Paul  said  at  that  time  to 
Peter  happened  to  be  exactly  what  he  wanted  to  say,  in  the  epistle, 
to  the  Galatians.  This  section,  therefore,  forms  a  transition  to 
the  second  main  division  of  the  epistle.  It  has  sometimes  been 
thought  surprising  that  Paul  does  not  say  how  Peter  took  his 
rebuke.  The  conclusion  has  even  been  drawn  that  if  Peter  had 
acknowledged  his  error  Paul  would  have  been  sure  to  say  so. 
Such  reasoning  ignores  the  character  of  this  section.  In  reporting 
the  substance  of  what  he  said  to  Peter,  Paul  has  laid  bare  the  very 
depths  of  his  own  life.  To  return,  after  such  a  passage,  to  the 
incident  at  Antioch  would  have  been  pedantic  and  unnecessary. 
Long  before  the  end  of  the  second  chapter  Paul  has  forgotten  all 
about  Peter,  all  about  Antioch,  and  all  about  the  whole  of  his  past 
history.  He  is  thinking  only  of  the  grace  of  Christ,  and  how 
some  men  are  trampling  it  under  foot.  0  foolish  Galatians,  to 
desert  so  great  a  salvation! 

6.     PAUL'S  DEFENSE  OF  HIS  GOSPEL.     GAL.  3:1  to  5  :  12 

Salvation  cannot  be  earned  by  human  effort,  but  must  be  re- 
ceived simply  as  a  free  gift.  Christ  has  died  to  save  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law:  to  submit  again  to  the  yoke  of  bondage  is 
disloyalty  to  him — that  is  the  great  thesis  that  Paul  sets  out  to 
prove. 

He  proves  it  first  by  an  argument  from  experience.  Gal.  3  :  1-5. 
You  received  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  palpable  manifestation,  before  you 
ever  saw  the  Judaizers,  before  you  ever  thought  of  keeping  the 


THE  CONFLICT  WITH  THE  JUDAIZERS  IOI 

Mosaic  law.  You  received  the  Spirit  by  faith  alone.  How  then 
can  you  now  think  that  the  law  is  necessary?  Surely  there  can  be 
nothing  higher  than  the  Spirit. 

In  the  second  place,  there  is  an  argument  from  Scripture.  Not 
those  who  depend  upon  the  works  of  the  law,  but  those  who  believe, 
have  the  benefit  of  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham.    Vs.6-22. 

In  the  third  place,  by  the  use  of  various  figures,  Paul  contrasts 
the  former  bondage  with  the  present  freedom.  Gal.  3  :  23  to  4  :  7. 
The  life  under  the  law  was  a  period  of  restraint  like  that  of  child- 
hood, preliminary  to  faith  in  Christ.  The  law  was  intended  to 
produce  the  consciousness  of  sin,  in  order  that  the  resultant  hope- 
lessness might  lead  men  to  accept  the  Saviour.  Vs.  23-25.  But 
now  all  Christians  alike,  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  are  sons  of  God 
in  Christ,  and  therefore  heirs  of  the  promise  made  to  Abraham. 
Vs.  26-29.  Being  sons  of  God,  with  all  the  glorious  freedom  of 
sonship,  with  the  Spirit  crying,  "Abba,  Father,"  in  the  heart,  how 
can  we  think  of  returning  to  the  miserable  bondage  of  an  external 
and  legalistic  religion?     Gal.  4  :  1-11. 

In  the  fourth  place,  Paul  turns  away  from  argument  to  make  a 
personal  appeal.  Vs.  12-20.  What  has  become  of  your  devotion 
to  me?  Surely  I  have  not  become  your  enemy  just  because  I  tell 
you  the  truth.  The  Judaizers  are  estranging  you  from  me.  Listen 
to  me,  my  spiritual  children,  even  though  I  can  speak  to  you  only 
through  the  cold  medium  of  a  letter! 

In  the  fifth  place,  Paul,  in  his  perplexity,  bethinks  himself  of  one 
more  argument.  It  is  an  argument  that  would  appeal  especially 
to  those  who  were  impressed  by  the  Judaizers'  method  of  using  the 
Old  Testament,  but  it  also  has  permanent  validity.  The  funda- 
mental principle,  says  Paul,  for  which  I  am  arguing,  the  principle 
of  grace,  can  be  illustrated  from  the  story  of  Ishmael  and  Isaac. 
Ishmael  had  every  prospect  of  being  the  heir  of  Abraham.  It 
seemed  impossible  for  the  aged  Abraham  to  have  another  son. 
Nature  was  on  Ishmael's  side.  But  nature  was  overruled.  So  it 
is  to-day.  As  far  as  nature  is  concerned,  the  Jews  are  the  heirs 
of  Abraham — they  have  all  the  outward  marks  of  sonship.  But 
God  has  willed  otherwise.  He  has  chosen  to  give  the  inheritance 
to  the  heirs  according  to  promise.  The  principle  of  the  divine 
choice,  operative  on  a  small  scale  in  the  acceptance  of  Isaac,  is 
operative  now  on  a  large  scale  in  the  acceptance  of  the  Gentile  church. 

Finally,  Paul  concludes  the  central  section  of  the  epistle  by 
emphasizing  the  gravity  of  the  crisis.     Gal.  5  :  1-12.     Do  not  be 


102  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

deceived.  Circumcision  as  the  Judaizers  advocate  it  is  no  innocent 
thing;  it  means  the  acceptance  of  a  law  religion.  You  must  choose 
either  the  law  or  grace;  you  cannot  have  both. 

7.     THE  RESULTS  OF  PAUL'S  GOSPEL.     GAL.  5  :  13  to  6  :  10 

In  this  third  main  division  of  the  epistle  Paul  exhibits  the  practical 
working  of  faith.  Paul's  gospel  is  more  powerful  than  the  teaching  of 
the  Judaizers.  Try  to  keep  the  law  in  your  own  strength  and  you 
will  fail,  for  the  flesh  is  too  strong.  But  the  Spirit  is  stronger  than 
the  flesh,  and  the  Spirit  is  received  by  faith. 

8.     CONCLUSION.     GAL.  6  :  11-18 

This  concluding  section,  if  not  the  whole  epistle,  was  written 
with  Paul's  own  hand.  V.  11.  In  his  other  letters  Paul  dictated 
everything  but  a  brief  closing  salutation. 

In  the  closing  section,  Paul  lays  the  alternative  once  more  before 
his  readers.  The  Judaizers  have  worldly  aims,  they  boast  of 
worldly  advantages;  but  the  true  Christian  boasts  of  nothing  but 
the  cross.  Christianity,  as  here  portrayed,  is  not  the  gentle,  easy- 
going doctrine  that  is  being  mistaken  for  it  to-day.  It  is  no  light 
thing  to  say,  "The  world  hath  been  crucified  unto  me,  and  I  unto 
the  world."     But  the  result  is  a  new  creature! 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  203-213.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  article  on  "Ephesus"; 
Purves,  articles  on  "Galatia"  and  "Galatians,  Epistle  to  the"  (supple- 
mented). Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Ramsay,  article  on 
"Ephesus";  Dods,  article  on  "Galatians,  Epistle  to  the."  Ramsay, 
"St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the  Roman  Citizen,"  pp.  262-282;  "Pictures 
of  the  Apostolic  Church,"  pp.  247-269,  293-300.  Lewin,  "The  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  chs.  xii,  xiii.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  chs.  xii.  xiii,  xiv,  xv  and  xvi.  Stalker, 
"The  Life  of  St.  Paul,"  pp.  82-84,  108-118.  Lumby,  pp.  239-266. 
Cook,  pp.  476-485.  Plumptre,  pp.  124-136.  Rackham,  pp.  33i-37<>- 
M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  70-76. 
Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol. 
ii,  pp.  419-468:  Sanday,  "The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the 
Galatians."  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges": 
Perowne,  "The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to 
the  New  Testament,"  vol.  i,  pp.  164-202.  Lightfoot,  "Saint  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians."  The  two  last-named  works  are  intended 
primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also 
be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XIX 
PROBLEMS  OF  A  GENTILE  CHURCH 


Christianity,  according  to  Paul,  is  an  escape  from  the  world. 
Gal.  1  :  4.  All  human  distinctions  are  comparatively  unimportant. 
"There  can  be  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  there  can  be  neither  bond 
nor  free,  there  can  be  no  male  and  female."  Gal.  3  :  28.  Such  a 
doctrine  might  seem  logically  to  lead  to  fanaticism.  If  the  Christian 
is  already  a  citizen  of  heaven,  may  he  not  be  indifferent  to  the  con- 
ditions of  life  upon  this  earth?  Such  a  conclusion  was  altogether 
avoided  by  Paul.  In  First  Corinthians  Paul  is  revealed  as  the  most 
practical  of  men.  All  human  distinctions  are  subordinate  and 
secondary — and  yet  these  distinctions  are  carefully  observed. 
Paul  was  a  man  of  heroic  faith,  but  he  was  also  possessed  of 
admirable  tact. 

It  is  not  that  the  one  side  of  Paul's  nature  limited  the  other;  it 
is  not  that  common  sense  acted  as  a  check  to  transcendental 
religion.  On  the  contrary,  the  two  things  seemed  to  be  in  perfect 
harmony.  Just  because  Paul  was  inwardly  so  entirely  free  from 
the  world,  he  was  also  so  wise  in  dealing  with  worldly  affairs.  The 
secret  of  this  harmony  was  consecration.  Human  relationships, 
when  consecrated  to  God,  are  not  destroyed,  but  ennobled.  They 
cease,  indeed,  to  be  an  end  in  themselves,  but  they  become  a  means 
to  Christian  service.  The  Christian  man  has  no  right  to  be  in- 
different to  the  world.  If  he  is,  he  is  no  true  son  of  the  God  who 
made  the  world,  and  sent  the  Lord  to  save  it.  The  Christian,  like 
the  man  of  the  world,  is  profoundly  interested  in  the  conditions  of 
life  on  this  earth.  Only,  unlike  the  man  of  the  world,  he  is  not 
helpless  and  perplexed  in  the  presence  of  those  conditions;  but  from 
his  vantage  ground  of  heavenly  power,  he  shapes  them  to  the  divine 
will.  He  is  interested  in  the  world,  but  he  is  interested  in  it,  not 
as  its  servant,  but  as  its  master. 

So  in  First  Corinthians  Paul  lays  hold  of  certain  perplexing 
practical  problems  with  the  sure  grasp  of  one  who  is  called  to  rule 
and  not  to  serve.  Everything  that  he  touches  he  lifts  to  a  higher 
plane.  In  his  hands  even  the  simplest  things  of  life  receive  a 
heavenly  significance. 

103 


104  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

The  problems  that  are  discussed  in  First  Corinthians  stood  in  a 
special  relation  to  the  environment  of  the  Corinthian  church.  Most 
of  them  were  due  to  the  threatened  intrusions  of  Greek  paganism. 
They  are  closely  analogous,  however,  to  the  problems  which  we  have 
to  solve  to-day.  Paganism  and  worldliness  are  not  dead.  The 
Church  still  stands  in  the  midst  of  a  hostile  environment.  We  can 
still  use  the  teaching  of  Paul.  That  teaching  will  now  be  examined 
in  a  few  of  its  important  details. 

1.     THE  PARTIES 

Paul  mentions  four  parties  that  had  been  formed  in  the  Corinthian 
church — a  Paul-party,  an  Apollos-party,  a  Cephas-party  and  a 
Christ-party.  These  parties  do  not  seem  to  have  been  separated 
from  one  another  by  any  serious  doctrinal  differences,  and  it  is 
impossible  to  determine  their  characteristics  in  detail.  In  the 
section  where  the  party  spirit  is  discussed,  Paul  blames  the 
Corinthians  for  intellectual  pride.  This  fault  has  often  been 
connected  with  the  Apollos-party.  Apollos  was  an  Alexandrian, 
and  probably  had  an  Alexandrian  Greek  training.  He  might 
therefore  have  unconsciously  evoked  among  some  members  of  the 
Corinthian  church  an  excessive  admiration  for  his  more  pretentious 
style  of  preaching,  which  might  have  caused  them  to  despise  the 
simpler  manner  of  Paul.  Even  this  much,  however,  is  little  more 
than  surmise.  At  any  rate,  Apollos  should  not  be  blamed  for  the 
faults  of  those  who  misused  his  name.  He  is  praised  unstintedly 
by  Paul,  who  was  even  desirous  that  he  should  return  at  once  to 
Corinth.  I  Cor.  16  :  12.  Paul  blames  the  Paul-party  just  as 
much  as  any  of  the  other  three. 

The  Peter-party  was  composed  of  admirers  of  Peter,  who  had 
either  come  to  Corinth  from  the  scene  of  Peter's  labors  elsewhere, 
or  simply  had  known  of  Peter  by  hearsay.  It  is  unlikely  that  Peter 
himself  had  been  in  Corinth,  for  if  he  had  Paul  would  probably  have 
let  the  fact  appear  in  First  or  Second  Corinthians.  The  Christ- 
party  is  rather  puzzling.  A  comparison  with  the  false  teachers 
who  are  combated  in  Second  Corinthians  has  led  some  scholars  to 
suppose  that  it  was  a  Judaizing  party,  which  emphasized  a  personal 
acquaintance  with  the  earthly  Jesus  as  a  necessary  qualification 
of  apostleship.  In  that  case,  however,  Paul  would  probably  have 
singled  out  the  Christ-party  for  special  attack.  More  probably 
these  were  simply  men  who,  in  proud  opposition  to  the  adherents 
of  Paul,  of  Apollos  and  of  Cephas,  emphasized  their  own  independ- 


PROBLEMS  OF  A  GENTILE  CHURCH  105 

ence  of  any  leader  other  than  Christ.  Of  course,  the  watchword, 
"I  am  of  Christ,"  if  used  in  a  better  spirit,  would  have  been  alto- 
gether praiseworthy,  and  indeed  Paul  desires  all  the  parties  to 
unite  in  it.     I  Cor.  3  :  21-23. 

Perhaps  it  is  a  mistake  to  attribute  to  these  parties  anything  like 
stability.  On  the  whole,  the  passage  gives  the  impression  that  it 
is  not  the  individual  parties  that  Paul  is  condemning,  but  the  party 
spirit.  That  party  spirit  was  manifested  by  watchwords  like  those 
which  are  enumerated  in  I  Cor.  1  :  12,  but  that  that  enumeration 
was  meant  to  be  complete,  does  not  appear.  The  whole  effort  to 
determine  the  characteristics  of  the  individual  parties — an  effort 
which  has  absorbed  the  attention  of  many  scholars — should  perhaps 
be  abandoned. 

Paul's  treatment  of  the  party  spirit  exhibits  his  greatness  not 
only  as  an  administrator,  but  also  as  a  writer.  The  subject  was 
certainly  not  inspiring;  yet  under  Paul's  touch  it  becomes  luminous 
with  heavenly  glory.  The  contrast  of  human  wisdom  with  the 
message  of  the  cross,  I  Cor.  1  :  18-31,  where  a  splendid  rhythm  of 
language  matches  the  sublimity  of  the  thought,  the  wonderful 
description  of  the  freedom  and  power  of  the  man  who  possesses  the 
Spirit  of  God,  the  grand  climax  of  the  third  chapter,  "For  all  things 
are  yours;  whether  Paul,  or  Apollos,  or  Cephas,  or  the  world,  or 
life,  or  death,  or  things  present,  or  things  to  come;  all  are  yours; 
and  ye  are  Christ's;  and  Christ  is  God's" — these  are  among  the 
passages  that  can  never  be  forgotten. 

2.     THINGS  SACRIFICED  TO  IDOLS 

The  question  of  meats  offered  to  idols,  which  Paul  discusses  in 
I  Cor.  8  :  1  to  11  :  1,  was  exceedingly  intricate.  To  it  Paul  applies 
several  great  principles.  In  the  first  place,  there  is  the  principle  of 
Christian  freedom.  The  Christian  has  been  delivered  from  enslav- 
ing superstitions.  Idols  have  no  power;  they  cannot  impart  any 
harmful  character  to  the  good  things  which  God  has  provided  for 
the  sustenance  of  man.  In  the  second  place,  however,  there  is  the 
principle  of  loyalty.  The  fact  that  idols  are  nothing  does  not  render 
idol-worship  morally  indifferent.  On  the  contrary,  idolatry  is 
always  sinful.  If  the  eating  of  certain  kinds  of  food  under  certain 
conditions  involves  participation  in  idolatry  then  it  is  disloyalty  to 
the  one  true  God.  The  joint  operation  of  the  two  principles  of 
freedom  and  of  loyalty  seems  to  lead  in  Paul's  mind  to  the  following 
practical  conclusion: — The  Christian  may  eat  the  meat  that  has 


106  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

been  offered  to  idols  if  it  is  simply  put  on  sale  in  the  market  place 
or  set  before  him  at  an  ordinary  meal;  but  he  must  not  take  part 
with  the  heathen  in  specifically  religious  feasts.  The  whole  question, 
however,  is  further  viewed  in  the  light  of  a  third  principle — the 
principle  of  Christian  love.  Even  things  that  are  in  themselves 
innocent  must  be  given  up  if  a  brother  by  them  is  led  into  conduct 
which  for  him  is  sin.  Christ  has  died  for  that  weaker  brother; 
surely  the  Christian,  then,  may  not  destroy  him.  Thus  love,  even 
more  than  loyalty,  limits  freedom — but  it  is  a  blessed  limitation. 
The  principles  here  applied  by  Paul  to  the  question  of  the  Corinthian 
Christians  will  solve  many  a  problem  of  the  modern  Church. 

3.     SPIRITUAL  GIFTS 

The  principle  of  Christian  love,  with  the  related  principle  of 
toleration,  is  applied  also  to  another  set  of  problems,  the  problems 
with  regard  to  the  exercise  of  spiritual  gifts.  The  passage  in  which 
Paul  discusses  these  problems,  aside  from  its  spiritual  and  moral 
teaching,  is  of  singular  historical  interest.  It  affords  a  unique 
picture  of  the  devotional  meetings  of  an  apostolic  church.  The 
characteristic  of  these  meetings  was  the  enthusiasm  which  prevailed 
in  them.  Paul  is  not  at  all  desirous  of  dampening  that  enthusiasm. 
On  the  contrary  the  gifts  in  question  were  in  his  judgment  really 
bestowed  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Even  the  gift  of  tongues,  which 
Paul  limits  in  its  operation,  is  in  his  judgment  of  genuine  value. 
Indeed,  he  himself  had  exercised  it  even  more  than  the  other 
Christians.  I  Cor.  14  ;  18.  This  last  fact  should  correct  any 
unworthy  impression  which  we  might  have  formed  with  regard  to 
the  gift.  If  speaking  with  tongues  was  practiced  by  Paul,  then  it 
was  no  mere  unhealthy  emotionalism.  We  are  to-day  unable  to 
understand  it  fully,  but  in  the  apostolic  Church  it  was  a  real  ex- 
pression of  Christian  experience. 

Paul  desires,  not  to  dampen  the  enthusiasm  of  the  Corinthian 
church,  but  merely  to  eliminate  certain  harmful  by-products  of  that 
which  was  in  itself  altogether  excellent.  The  first  principle  which 
he  applies  is  the  principle  of  toleration.  There  is  room  in  the 
Church  for  many  different  kinds  of  workers.  "There  are  diversities 
of  gifts,  but  the  same  Spirit."  The  principle  is  often  neglected  in 
the  modern  Church.  Toleration,  indeed,  is  on  everyone's  lips; 
but  it  is  not  the  kind  of  toleration  that  Paul  means.  It  is  often 
nothing  more  than  indifference  to  the  great  verities  of  the  faith. 
Such  toleration  would  have  met  with  nothing  but  an  anathema  from 


PROBLEMS  OF  A  GENTILE  CHURCH  107 

Paul.  The  toleration  that  Paul  is  commending  is  a  toleration,  not 
with  regard  to  matters  of  doctrine,  but  with  regard  to  methods  of 
work.  Such  toleration  is  often  sadly  lacking.  Some  advocates  of 
missions  think  that  almost  every  Christian  who  stays  at  home 
is  a  coward;  some  good,  conservative  elders,  on  the  other  hand, 
have  little  interest  in  what  passes  the  bounds  of  their  own 
congregation.  Some  Christians  of  reserved  habits  are  shocked 
at  the  popular  methods  of  the  evangelists;  some  evangelists  are 
loud  in  their  ignorant  denunciation  of  the  Christian  scholar.  In 
other  words,  many  very  devout  Christians  of  the  present  day 
act  as  though  they  had  never  read  the  twelfth  chapter  of  First 
Corinthians. 

The  principle  of  toleration,  however,  culminates  in  the  principle 
of  love.  If  there  must  be  a  choice  between  the  exercise  of  different 
gifts,  then  the  choice  should  be  in  favor  of  those  gifts  which  are 
most  profitable  to  other  men.  Finally,  even  the  highest  spiritual 
gifts  are  not  independent  of  reason.  I  Cor.  14  :  32,  33.  That  is  a 
far-reaching  principle.  Some  modern  Christians  seem  to  think 
that  an  appeal  to  the  inward  voice  of  the  Spirit  excuses  them  from 
listening  to  reasonable  counsel.     Such  is  not  the  teaching  of  Paul. 

4.     THE  RESURRECTION 

The  error  which  is  combated  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  epistle 
could  hardly  have  been  a  denial,  in  general,  of  continued  existence 
after  death,  but  was  rather  a  denial  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body 
as  over  against  the  Greek  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul. 
In  reply,  Paul  appeals  to  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  The  appeal 
would  seem  to  be  futile  unless  Paul  means  that  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus  was  a  bodily  resurrection.  If  the  appearances  of  Jesus  were 
no  more  than  incorporeal  manifestations  of  his  spirit,  then  obviously 
the  believer  in  a  mere  immortality  of  the  soul  remained  unrefuted. 
In  this  chapter  there  is  an  advance  over  the  simple  teaching  of 
First  Thessalonians.  Here  the  character  of  the  resurrection  body 
comes  into  view.  The  resurrection  body  will  have  a  real  connection 
with  the  old  body — otherwise  there  would  be  no  resurrection — but 
the  weakness  of  the  old  body  will  be  done  away.  There  is  con- 
tinuity, but  also  transformation. 

5.     INCIDENTAL  INFORMATION  ABOUT  JESUS 

Certain  passages  in  First  Corinthians,  which  are  introduced  only 
in  an  incidental  way,  as  illustrations  of  the  principles  which  are 


108  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

being  applied,  are  of  inestimable  historical  value.  These  passages 
include  not  only  the  great  autobiographical  passage  in  the  ninth 
chapter,  where  Paul  illustrates  from  his  own  life  the  limitation  of 
the  principle  of  freedom  by  the  principle  of  love,  but  also  two  all- 
important  passages  which  refer  to  the  life  of  Christ. 

It  is  generally  admitted  that  First  Corinthians  was  written  at 
about  A.  D.  55.  The  eleventh  chapter  of  the  epistle  gives  an  account 
of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  which  Jesus  teaches  the 
sacrificial  significance  of  his  death ;  and  the  fifteenth  chapter  gives 
a  list  of  the  appearances  of  Jesus  after  his  resurrection.  The 
information  contained  in  these  passages  was  not  invented  by  Paul; 
indeed  he  distinctly  says  that  it  was  "received."  In  A.  D.  55,  then, 
not  only  Paul,  but  also  the  Church  generally  believed  that  Jesus' 
death,  according  to  his  own  teaching,  was  sacrificial,  and  appealed 
in  support  of  his  resurrection  to  a  wealth  of  competent  testimony. 
But  from  whom  had  Paul  "received"  these  things?  Hardly  from 
anyone  except  those  who  had  been  Christians  before  him — in  other 
words,  from  the  Palestinian  church.  We  have  here  an  irremovable 
confirmation  of  the  Gospel  view  of  Jesus.  First  Corinthians  is  a 
historical  document  of  absolutely  priceless  value. 

The  incidental  character  of  these  historical  passages  is  especially 
noteworthy.  It  shows  that  Paul  knew  far  more  about  Jesus  than 
he  found  occasion  in  the  epistles  to  tell.  If  he  had  told  more, 
no  doubt  the  Gospel  picture  of  Jesus  would  have  received  confirma- 
tion throughout. 


In  the  Library — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  213-221.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  article  on  "Apollos"; 
Purves  and  Davis,  article  on  "Corinthians,  Epistles  to  the."  Hastings, 
"Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Robertson,  article  on  "Corinthians,  First 
Epistle  to  the."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and  Its  Writers," 
pp.  58-64.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English 
Readers,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  281-356:  Shore,  "The  First  Epistle  of  Paul  the 
Apostle  to  the  Corinthians."  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools": 
Lias,  "The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians."  Zahn,  "Introduction 
to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  i,  pp.  256-306.  "The  International 
Critical  Commentary":  Robertson  and  Plummer,  "A  Critical  and 
Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Co- 
rinthians." The  two  last-named  works  presuppose  a  knowledge  of 
Greek. 


LESSON  XX 

THE  APOSTLE  AND  HIS  MINISTRY 


1.  ADDRESS  AND  THANKSGIVING.     II  Cor.  1  :  1-11 

In  First  Corinthians  the  obscure  Sosthenes  is  found  to  be  associated 
with  Paul  in  the  address  of  the  epistle;  in  Second  Corinthians  it  is 
Timothy,  one  of  the  best-known  of  the  helpers  of  Paul.  Even  if 
that  mission  of  Timothy  to  Corinth  which  is  mentioned  in  First 
Corinthians  had  resulted  in  failure,  Timothy's  usefulness  in  the 
church  was  not  permanently  affected. 

After  the  address,  comes,  as  is  usual  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  an 
expression  of  thanksgiving  to  God.  This  time,  however,  it  is  not 
thanksgiving  for  the  Christian  state  of  the  readers,  but  thanks- 
giving for  Paul's  own  escape  from  danger.  The  absence  of  thanks- 
giving for  the  readers  does  not  mean  here,  as  in  the  case  of  Galatians, 
that  there  was  nothing  to  be  thankful  for  in  the  church  that  is  being 
addressed,  for  the  whole  first  section  of  the  letter  is  suffused  with  a 
spirit  of  thankfulness  for  the  Corinthians'  return  to  their  true 
allegiance;  it  means  rather  simply  that  the  thought  of  the  deadly 
personal  danger,  and  of  the  remarkable  escape,  were  for  the  moment 
in  the  forefront  of  Paul's  thought.  Even  that  personal  matter, 
however,  was  used  by  Paul  to  fortify  his  readers  against  similar 
trials,  and  especially  to  strengthen  still  further  the  bonds  of  sympathy 
which  had  at  last  been  restored  between  him  and  them. 

What  this  danger  was  from  which  Paul  had  just  escaped  cannot 
be  determined.  It  is  as  much  a  puzzle  as  the  fighting  with  beasts 
at  Ephesus,  which  Paul  mentions  in  I  Cor.  15  :  32.  Neither  one 
nor  the  other  can  very  well  be  identified  with  the  trouble  caused  by 
Demetrius  the  silversmith,  Acts  19  :  23-41,  for  there  Paul  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  in  deadly  danger.  Some  suppose  that  the  fighting 
with  beasts  is  literally  meant ;  that  Paul  was  actually  exposed  to  the 
wild  beasts  in  the  arena  and  escaped  only  in  some  remarkable  way. 
It  should  be  observed  that  Paul  does  not  say,  with  regard  to  the 
danger  mentioned  in  Second  Corinthians,  that  it  occurred  in  Ephesus, 
but  only  that  it  occurred  in  Asia.  The  expression,  "weighed  down," 
in  II  Cor.  1  :  8  perhaps  points  to  some  form  of  illness  rather  than  to 
persecution. 

109 


110  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

2.  THE  APOSTLE  AND  THE  MINISTRY  OF  RECONCILIATION. 
II  Cor.   1  :  12  to  7  :  16 

Immediately  after  the  thanksgiving  for  his  escape  from  death, 
Paul  begins  the  defense  of  his  ministry.  After  the  suspense  of  the 
previous  days,  he  feels  the  need  of  reviewing  the  methods  and 
motives  of  his  labor  among  the  Corinthians,  in  order  that  the 
last  vestige  of  suspicion  may  be  removed.  This  he  does  in  an  unre- 
strained, cordial  sort  of  way,  which  reveals  the  deepest  secrets  of 
his  heart,  and  culminates  here  and  there  in  grand  expositions  of  the 
very  essence  of  the  gospel. 

First,  in  just  a  passing  word,  ch.  1: 13,  14,  he  defends  his  letters 
against  that  charge  of  obscurity  or  concealment  which  is  hinted  at 
elsewhere  in  the  epistle.     Compare  ch.  4  :  1-4;  11  :  6. 

Next,  he  defends  himself  against  the  charge  of  fickleness  in  his 
journey  plans.  At  some  time,  probably  during  or  after  the  unsuc- 
cessful visit  alluded  to  in  ch.  2:1,  Paul  had  formed  the  plan  of 
returning  to  Corinth  by  the  direct  route.  This  plan  he  had  not 
carried  out,  and  his  abandonment  of  it  apparently  confirmed  the 
impression  of  weakness  which  had  been  left  by  the  unsuccessful 
visit.  "He  is  very  bold  in  letters,"  said  his  opponents,  "but  when 
he  is  here  he  is  weak,  and  now  he  is  afraid  to  return."  It  was  a 
petty  criticism,  and  a  lesser  man  might  have  answered  it  in  a  petty 
way.  But  Paul  was  able  to  lift  the  whole  discussion  to  a  loftier 
plane.  His  answer  to  the  criticism  was  very  simple — the  reason 
why  he  had  not  returned  to  Corinth  at  once  was  that  he  did  not 
want  to  return  again  in  grief  and  in  severity;  for  the  sake  of  the 
Corinthians  themselves  he  wanted  to  give  them  time  to  repent, 
before  the  final  and  fatal  issue  should  be  raised.  Characteristically, 
however,  Paul  does  not  content  himself  with  this  simple  answer; 
indeed  he  does  not  even  begin  with  it.  A  specific  explanation  of  the 
change  in  his  plans  would  have  refuted  the  criticism  immediately 
under  consideration,  but  Paul  felt  the  need  of  doing  far  more  than 
that.  What  he  desired  to  do  was  to  make  not  only  this  criticism,  but 
all  similar  criticisms,  impossible.  This  he  does  by  the  fine  reference 
to  the  positive  character  of  his  gospel.  "You  say  that  I  am  un- 
certain in  my  plans,  that  I  say  yes  and  no  in  one  breath.  Well, 
the  gospel  that  I  preached,  at  any  rate,  was  no  such  uncertain  thing 
as  that.  My  gospel  was  a  great  'Yes'  to  all  the  promises  of  God." 
Such  a  method  of  refutation  lifts  the  reader  far  above  all  petty 
criticisms  to  the  great  things  of  Paul's  gospel. 

Yet  this  reference  to  great  principles  is  no  mere  excuse  to  avoid 


THE  APOSTLE  AND  HIS  MINISTRY  ill 

the  simple  question  at  issue.  On  the  contrary,  Paul  is  perfectly 
frank  about  the  reason  why  he  had  not  gone  to  Corinth  as  he  had 
intended.  It  was  out  of  love  to  the  Corinthian  church,  and  this 
had  also  prompted  the  writing  of  a  severe  letter.  Here,  ch.  2  :  5-11, 
Paul  refers  to  the  offender  whose  case  had  been  made  a  test  at  the 
time  of  the  recent  painful  visit.  This  offender  was  probably  different 
from  the  incestuous  person  who  is  so  sternly  dealt  with  in  I  Cor. 
5  :  1-5.  His  offense  is  thought  by  many  to  have  been  some  personal 
insult  to  Paul,  II  Cor.  2  :  5,  but  this  is  not  quite  certain.  At  any 
rate,  whatever  his  original  offence,  Paul's  demand  for  his  punish- 
ment had  become  a  test  of  the  loyalty  of  the  church.  At  first  the 
demand  had  been  refused,  but  now  the  majority  of  the  congregation 
has  agreed  and  the  man  himself  is  deeply  repentant,  so  that  Paul 
is  only  afraid  lest  severity  may  go  too  far.  It  is  hardly  worth  while 
saying  that  the  character  of  Paul  was  entirely  free  from  vindictive- 
ness.  When  the  discipline  of  the  Church  would  permit  it,  Paul  was 
the  first  to  propose  counsels  of  mercy. 

The  reference  to  the  epistles  of  commendation  which  had  been 
used  by  Paul's  opponents  in  Corinth,  ch.  3:1,  has  been  made  the 
basis  of  far-reaching  conclusions  about  the  whole  history  of  the 
apostolic  age.  From  whom  could  the  opponents  have  received 
their  letters  of  introduction?  Only,  it  is  said,  from  Palestine,  and 
probably  from  the  original  apostles.  This  conclusion  is  hasty,  to 
say  the  least.  It  should  be  noticed  that  not  only  letters  to  the 
Corinthian  church  but  also  letters  from  the  church  are  apparently 
in  mind.  V.  1.  If,  then,  the  Corinthian  church  had  been  asked  to 
supply  these  false  teachers  with  letters  of  commendation,  perhaps 
the  other  churches  that  had  supplied  them  with  letters  were  no 
nearer  to  Jerusalem  than  Corinth  was. 

The  mention  of  these  letters  of  commendation  introduces  one  of 
the  grandest  passages  in  the  New  Testament.  "I,"  says  Paul,  by 
way  of  transition,  "do  not  need  any  letters  of  commendation.  My 
work  is  sufficient  commendation.  What  I  have  accomplished  in 
the  hearts  of  men  is  an  epistle  written  by  the  Spirit  of  God."  Then 
follows  the  magnificent  exposition  of  the  ministry  of  the  new 
covenant.  That  ministry  is  first  contrasted  with  the  old  dispensa- 
tion, perhaps  with  reference  to  an  excessive  valuation,  by  the 
opponents,  of  a  continued  Judaism  in  the  Church.  The  old  covenant 
was  glorious,  but  how  much  more  glorious  is  the  new!  The  old 
was  a  ministry  of  condemnation,  but  the  new  is  a  ministry  of 
justification.    The  old  was  a  ministry  of  an  external  law,  the  new 


112  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

is  a  ministry  of  the  life-giving  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  There 
is  no  reason  any  longer  for  concealment.  The  Spirit  brings  free- 
dom and  openness  and  light. 

This  treasure  is  held  indeed  in  earthen  vessels.  The  recent 
danger  that  Paul  has  passed  through,  as  well  as  the  overpowering 
hardships  of  his  life,  make  him  painfully  conscious  of  human  weak- 
ness. But  that  weakness  is  blessed  which  in  all  the  fuller  glory 
reveals  the  all-conquering  power  of  God.  The  Christian  need 
never  despair,  for  by  the  eye  of  faith  he  can  detect  those  unseen 
things  which  are  eternal.  The  present  body  may  be  dissolved,  but 
the  resurrection  body  will  be  ready.  Indeed,  even  if  the  Christian 
by  death  is  separated  for  a  time  altogether  from  the  body,  he  need 
not  fear.  To  be  absent  from  the  body  is  to  be  present  with  the 
Lord. 

The  climax  of  the  whole  glorious  passage  is  the  brief  exposition 
of  the  ministry  of  reconciliation  which  begins  with  ch.  5  :  11.  Here 
we  are  introduced  to  the  secret  of  the  remarkable  life  which  is 
revealed  in  Second  Corinthians  and  in  the  other  epistles  of  Paul. 
Reconciliation  with  God  through  the  death  of  Christ  in  our  behalf 
and  in  our  stead,  consequent  freedom  from  sin  and  from  the  world, 
a  new  and  glorious  life  under  the  favor  of  God — these  are  the  things 
that  Paul  experienced  in  his  own  life,  these  are  the  things  that  he 
preached  to  others,  regardless  of  all  hardship  and  criticism,  and 
these  are  the  things,  now  and  always,  which  contain  the  real  springs 
of  the  Church's  power. 

After  an  uncompromising  warning  against  impurity  and  worldli- 
ness,  delivered  from  the  lofty  vantage  ground  that  has  just  been 
reached,  the  apostle  gives  expression  once  more  to  the  joy  that  he 
has  received  from  the  good  news  which  Titus  brought  him;  and  then 
proceeds  to  an  entirely  different  matter. 

3.  THE  COLLECTION.     II  Cor.,  chs.  8,  9 

Two  whole  chapters  of  the  epistle  are  devoted  to  the  collection 
for  the  Jerusalem  church.  The  history  of  this  matter,  so  far  as  it 
can  be  traced,  is  briefly  as  follows:  At  the  time  of  the  Jerusalem 
council,  the  pillars  of  the  Jerusalem  church  had  requested  Paul  to 
remember  the  Jerusalem  poor.  At  the  time  when  First  Corinthians 
was  written,  Paul  had  already  started  a  collection  for  this  purpose 
in  the  churches  of  Galatia,  and  in  First  Corinthians  he  asks  the 
Corinthians  to  take  part.  I  Cor.  16  :  1-4.  In  Second  Corinthians 
he  announces  that  the  churches  of  Macedonia  have  contributed 


THE  APOSTLE  AND  HIS  MINISTRY  1 13 

bountifully,  II  Cor.  8  :  1-5,  and  urges  the  continuance  of  the  col- 
lection in  Corinth.  Finally,  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  which 
was  written  from  Corinth  only  a  short  time  after  Second  Corinthians, 
he  mentions  the  collection  in  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  announces 
his  intention  of  journeying  to  Jerusalem  with  the  gifts,  and  asks 
the  Roman  Christians  to  pray  that  the  ministration  may  be  ac- 
ceptable to  the  Jerusalem  church.     Rom.  15  :  25-27,  31,  32. 

With  his  customary  foresight,  Paul  made  careful  provision  for 
the  administration  of  the  gifts,  in  order  to  avoid  all  possible  mis- 
understanding or  suspicion.  For  example,  the  churches  are  to 
choose  delegates  to  carry  their  bounty  to  Jerusalem.  I  Cor.  16  :  3. 
Possibly  the  delegates  are  to  be  identified  with  the  persons  who  are 
named  in  Acts  20  : 4.  Luke  does  not  mention  the  collection,  but 
it  is  alluded  to  in  Acts  24  :  17. 

Paul's  treatment  of  the  collection  in  II  Cor.,  chs.  8,  9,  was  not 
only  adapted  to  accomplish  its  immediate  purpose,  but  also  has 
been  of  high  value  to  the  Christian  Church.  These  chapters  have 
assured  to  the  right  use  of  wealth  a  place  of  real  dignity  among  the 
forms  of  Christian  service. 

4.  THE  OPPONENTS.     II  Cor.,  chs.  10  to  13 

The  striking  change  of  tone  at  ch.  10  :  1  is  amply  explained  by 
the  change  of  subject.  In  the  first  part  of  the  epistle,  Paul  has  been 
thinking  of  the  return  of  the  majority  of  the  congregation  to  their 
allegiance;  now  he  turns  to  deal  with  the  false  teachers  who  have 
been  causing  all  the  trouble.  It  is  still  necessary  to  meet  their 
attacks  and  remove  every  vestige  of  influence  which  they  may 
still  have  retained  over  the  church.  Their  attack  upon  Paul  was 
of  a  peculiarly  mean  and  unworthy  character;  the  indignation  which 
Paul  displays  in  these  chapters  was  fully  justified. 

The  opponents  were  certainly  Jews,  and  prided  themselves  on 
the  fact.  Ch.  11  :  22.  But  it  does  not  appear  with  certainty  that 
they  were  Judaizers.  If  they  were  intending  to  come  forward  with 
any  demand  of  circumcision  or  of  observance  of  the  Mosaic  law, 
such  demand  was  still  kept  in  the  background.  Indeed,  there  is  no 
indication  that  the  doctrine  that  they  preached  was  different  in 
important  respects  from  that  of  Paul.  In  particular,  there  is  no 
indication  that  they  advocated  a  different  view  about  Jesus.  One 
verse,  ch.  11  : 4,  has,  indeed,  been  regarded  as  such  an  indication, 
but  only  by  an  exceedingly  doubtful  interpretation.  Probably  the 
other  Jesus  whom  the  opponents  preached  existed  only  in  their  own 

Sen.  r.  ill.  55. 


114  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

claim.  They  said  merely,  "Paul  has  kept  something  back,"  v.  6, 
margin;  ch.  4  :3;  "we  alone  can  give  you  adequate  information; 
we  alone  can  proclaim  the  true  Jesus,  the  true  Spirit  and  the  true 
gospel."  In  reality,  however,  they  had  nothing  new  to  offer. 
Paul  had  made  the  whole  gospel  known. 

It  is  further  not  even  quite  clear  that  the  opponents  laid  stress 
upon  a  personal  acquaintance  with  the  earthly  Jesus,  and  so  played 
the  original  apostles  off  against  Paul.  The  expression  "chiefest 
apostles,"  ch.  11  : 5,  is  clearly  nothing  more  than  an  ironical 
designation  of  the  false  teachers  themselves.  It  is  true,  the  false 
teachers  claimed  to  belong  in  a  special  sense  to  Christ,  ch  10  :  7, 
and  to  be  in  a  special  sense  "ministers  of  Christ."  Ch.  11  :  23. 
But  it  is  not  at  all  clear — despite  ch.  5  :  16 — that  the  connection 
which  they  claimed  to  have  with  Christ  was  that  of  personal 
acquaintance,  either  directly  or  through  their  authorities,  with  the 
earthly  Jesus.  Finally,  these  false  teachers  cannot  with  any 
certainty  be  connected  with  the  Christ-party  of  First  Corinthians. 

The  chief  value  of  the  last  four  chapters  of  the  epistle  is  the  wealth 
of  autobiographical  material  which  they  contain.  Against  the 
insidious  personal  attacks  of  the  opponents,  Paul  was  obliged  to 
speak  of  certain  personal  matters  about  which  he  might  otherwise 
have  been  silent.  Had  he  been  silent,  the  Church  would  have  been 
the  loser.  To  know  the  inner  life  of  the  apostle  Paul  is  to  know 
Christ;  for  Paul  was  in  Christ  and  Christ  was  in  Paul.  What  could 
compensate  us  for  the  loss  of  II  Cor.  12  :  7-10?  Through  these 
words  the  bodily  weakness  of  Paul  has  forever  been  made  profitable 
for  the  strength  of  the  Church. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
221-225.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  and  Davis,  article 
on  "Corinthians,  Epistles  to  the."  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the 
Bible":  Robertson,  article  on  "Corinthians,  Second  Epistle  to  the." 
M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  65-69.  Beet, 
"A  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,"  seventh 
edition,  pp.  1-20,  317-542.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary 
for  English  Readers,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  357-417:  Plumptre,  "The  Second 
Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Corinthians."  "The  Cambridge 
Bible  for  Schools":  Lias,  "The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians." 
Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  i,  pp.  307-351.  The 
last-named  work  presupposes  a  knowledge  of  Greek. 


LESSON  XXI 
THE  GOSPEL  OF  SALVATION 


The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  though  it  is  not  merely  a  systematic 
treatise,  is  more  systematic  than  any  other  of  the  Pauline  Epistles. 
Unlike  the  epistles  that  preceded  it,  it  was  written  in  a  period  of 
comparative  quiet  between  two  great  stages  in  the  apostle's  work. 
Not  unnaturally,  therefore,  it  contains  something  like  a  summary 
of  Paul's  teaching.  The  summary,  however,  does  not  embrace  the 
whole  of  the  Pauline  theology,  but  only  one  important  department 
of  it.  The  nature  of  God,  for  example,  and  the  person  of  Christ, 
are  not  discussed  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Of  course  Paul 
held  very  definite  views  upon  these  subjects,  and  these  views  are 
presupposed  on  every  page  of  the  epistle — especially  the  loftiest 
possible  conception  of  the  person  of  Christ  lies  at  the  background  of 
this  entire  account  of  Christ's  work — but  such  presuppositions  do 
not  in  this  epistle  receive  an  elaborate  exposition.  The  real  subject 
of  the  first  eight  chapters  of  Romans  is  not  theology  in  general, 
but  simply  the  way  of  salvation.  How  can  man  be  saved — that  is 
the  question  which  Paul  answers  in  this  epistle. 

Obviously  the  question  is  of  the  utmost  practical  importance. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  absolutely  fundamental  for  the 
establishment  of  Christian  faith.  This  estimate,  which  was 
formerly  a  matter  of  course,  has  in  recent  years  unfortunately  fallen 
into  disrepute.  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  after  all,  it  is  said,  is 
concerned  with  theology,  whereas  what  we  need  is  simple  faith. 
We  must  return  from  Romans  to  the  Gospels,  from  Paul  to  Christ. 
The  words  of  Jesus,  recorded  in  the  Gospels,  are  thus  emphasized 
to  the  prejudice  of  the  teaching  of  the  apostle. 

This  tendency  should  be  resisted  with  the  utmost  firmness.  It 
is  striking  at  the  very  vitals  of  the  Church's  life.  After  all,  Jesus 
came,  as  has  been  well  said,  not  to  say  something,  but  to  do  some- 
thing. His  words  are  very  precious,  we  could  never  do  without 
them;  but  after  all  they  are  subsidiary  to  his  deeds.  His  life  and 
death  and  resurrection — these  are  the  things  that  wrought  salvation 
for  men.  And  these  great  saving  acts  could  not  be  fully  explained 
till  after  they  had  been  done.     For  an  explanation  of  them,  therefore, 

ii5 


Il6  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

we  must  turn  not  only  to  the  Gospels  but  also  to  the  epistles,  not 
only  to  Jesus  but  also  to  Paul.  Paul  was  in  a  special  sense  our 
apostle;  like  us,  he  had  never  known  the  earthly  Jesus.  Just  for 
that  reason,  through  the  divine  revelation  that  was  granted  him, 
he  could  guide  all  subsequent  generations  to  the  risen  Christ. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  more  fully  perhaps  than  any  other  book, 
points  out  the  meaning  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ. 
It  does  not,  indeed,  solve  all  mysteries;  but  it  reveals  enough  to 
enable  us  to  believe. 

1.  THE  EDICT  OF  CLAUDIUS 

The  edict  of  Claudius  which  expelled  the  Jews  from  Rome  was 
certainly  not  permanently  effective;  indeed  there  are  some  indica- 
tions that  it  was  modified  almost  as  soon  as  it  was  issued.  But 
although  it  did  not  keep  the  Jews  out  of  Rome,  it  may  at  least  have 
hastened  the  separation  between  Judaism  and  Christianity.  If 
the  conflict  between  the  two,  as  a  conflict  within  Judaism,  had 
given  rise  to  the  hostile  edict,  then,  as  has  plausibly  been  suggested, 
the  separation  might  be  in  the  interests  of  both  parties.  If  the 
church  were  kept  separate  from  the  synagogue,  the  Jews  would  be 
protected  from  dangerous  disorders  and  from  the  opposition  which 
would  be  encountered  by  a  new  and  illegal  religion,  and  the  Chris- 
tians, on  the  other  hand,  would  be  protected  from  the  Claudian 
edict  against  the  Jews. 

2.  ADDRESS,  THANKSGIVING  AND  SUBJECT.     Rom.  1  : 1-17 

The  address  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  remarkable  for  the 
long  addition  which  is  made  to  the  name  of  the  author.  Paul  was 
writing  to  a  church  which  he  had  never  seen.  His  excuse  for  writing 
was  to  be  found  only  in  the  gospel  with  which  he  had  been  intrusted. 
At  the  very  start,  therefore,  he  places  his  gospel  in  the  foreground. 
Here,  however,  it  is  rather  the  great  presupposition  of  the  gospel 
which  is  in  mind — Jesus  Christ  in  his  double  nature.  One  who  has 
been  commissioned  to  preach  to  the  Gentiles  the  gospel  of  such  a 
Christ  may  certainly  address  a  letter  to  Rome. 

In  connection  with  the  customary  thanksgiving,  Paul  mentions 
his  long-cherished  desire  of  visiting  the  Roman  Christians.  He 
desires  to  impart  unto  them  some  spiritual  gift — no,  he  says,  rather 
he  desires  to  receive  from  them  as  well  as  to  give.  The  correction 
is  characteristic  of  Paul.  Some  men  would  have  felt  no  need  of 
making  it.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  Paul  was  fully  in  a  position  to 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  SALVATION  1 17 

impart  spiritual  gifts.  But  he  was  afraid  his  readers  might  feel 
hurt — as  though  the  apostle  thought  they  could  make  no  return  for 
the  benefit  which  the  visit  would  bring  them.  It  is  an  exquisite  bit 
of  fine  discernment  and  delicate  courtesy.  But  like  all  true  courtesy, 
it  was  based  on  fact.  Paul  was  really  not  a  man  to  decline  help  and 
comfort  from  even  the  humblest  of  the  brethren. 

In  vs.  16,  17,  the  theme  of  the  epistle  is  announced — the  gospel 
the  power  of  God  unto  salvation,  the  gospel  which  reveals  a  right- 
eousness of  God  that  is  received  by  faith.  The  meaning  of  "a 
righteousness  of  God"  has  been  much  disputed.  Some  think  that 
it  refers  to  the  righteousness  which  is  an  attribute  of  God.  More 
probably,  however,  it  is  to  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  ch.  10  :  3; 
Phil.  3:9.  It  then  refers  to  that  right  relation  of  man  to  God  which 
God  himself  produces.  There  are  two  ways  of  receiving  a  sentence 
of  acquittal  from  God  the  Judge.  One  is  by  keeping  the  law  of  God 
perfectly.  The  other  is  by  receiving  through  faith  the  righteousness 
of  Christ.  The  former  is  impossible  because  of  sin.  The  latter  has 
been  made  possible  by  the  gift  of  Christ.  As  sinners,  we  are  subject 
to  the  punishment  of  death.  But  that  punishment  has  been  paid 
for  us  by  Christ.  We  therefore  go  free;  we  can  start  fresh,  with  the 
consciousness  of  God's  favor.  We  are  "justified" — that  is,  "pro- 
nounced righteous" — not  because  we  are  free  from  sin,  but  because 
by  his  grace  God  looks  not  upon  us  but  upon  Christ.  We  have  been 
pronounced  righteous,  but  not  on  account  of  our  own  works.  We 
possess  not  our  own  righteousness  but    "a  righteousness  of  God." 

This  righteousness  of  God  is  received  by  faith.  Faith  is  not  a 
work,  it  is  simply  the  willingness  to  receive.  Christ  has  promised 
by  his  death  to  bring  us  to  God.  We  may  not  understand  it  all, 
but  is  Christ  to  be  believed?  Study  the  Gospel  picture  of  him,  and 
you  will  be  convinced  that  he  is. 

Justification  by  faith,  then,  means  being  pronounced  righteous 
by  God,  although  we  are  sinners.  It  might  seem  to  be  a  very 
dangerous  doctrine.  If  we  are  pronounced  righteous  whether  we 
are  really  righteous  or  not,  then  may  we  not  go  on  with  impunity 
in  sin?  Such  reasoning  ignores  the  results  of  justification.  Faith 
brings  more  than  forgiveness.  It  brings  a  new  life.  In  the  new 
life  sin  has  no  place.  The  Christian  has  broken  forever  with  his  old 
slavery.  Though  perfection  has  not  yet  been  attained  in  practice,  it 
has  been  attained  in  principle,  and  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit  all 
sin  will  finally  be  removed.  The  Christian  cannot  compromise  with 
sin.     Salvation  is  not  only  from  the  guilt  of  sin,  but  also  from  the 


Il8  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

power  of  it.     The  sixth  chapter  of  Romans  leaves  no  room  for  moral 

laxness 

3.  ROMANS  AND  GALATIANS 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  Romans  with  Galatians.  The  subject 
of  the  two  epistles  is  the  same.  Both  are  concerned  with  salvation 
by  faith  alone,  apart  from  the  works  of  the  law.  In  many  passages 
the  two  are  parallel.  The  fuller  exposition  in  Romans  is  often  the 
best  commentary  upon  the  briefer  statements  of  Galatians.  For 
example,  the  words:  "What  then  is  the  law?  It  was  added  because 
of  transgressions" — very  obscure  as  they  stand  in  Galatians — are 
explained  by  Rom.  5  :  20;  ch.  7.  In  tone,  however,  the  two  epistles 
are  widely  different.  Galatians  is  written  in  view  of  one  definite 
attack  upon  the  gospel;  Romans  is  a  general  exposition  summing 
up  the  results  of  the  conflict.  When  Paul  wrote  Galatians  he  was 
in  the  thick  of  the  battle;  at  the  time  of  Romans  he  had  fought  his 
way  through  to  the  heights. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  however,  is  no  cold,  purely  logical 
treatise.  Theology  here  is  interwoven  with  experience.  No  ex- 
position can  do  justice  to  this  wonderful  letter.  To  read  about  it 
is  sometimes  dull;  but  to  read  it  is  life. 

4.  THE  PAULINE  PHILOSOPHY  OF  HISTORY.     Rom.,  chs.  9  to  11 

Chapters  9  to  11  of  this  epistle  are  interesting  in  a  great  many 
ways.  They  are  interesting,  for  example,  in  their  tremendous  con- 
ception of  the  mystery  of  the  divine  will.  The  ninth  chapter  of 
Romans  is  a  good  corrective  for  any  carelessness  in  our  attitude 
toward  God.  After  all,  God  is  a  mystery.  How  little  we  know 
of  his  eternal  plan!  We  must  ever  tremble  before  him.  Yet  it  is 
such  a  God  who  has  invited  us,  through  Christ,  to  hold  communion 
with  himself.  There  is  the  true  wonder  of  the  gospel — that  it 
brings  us  into  fellowship,  not  with  a  God  of  our  own  devising,  not 
with  one  who  is  a  Father  and  nothing  else,  but  with  the  awful,  holy, 
mysterious  Maker  and  Ruler  of  all  things.  The  joy  of  the  believer 
is  the  deepest  of  all  joys.     It  is  a  joy  that  is  akin  to  holy  fear. 

These  chapters  are  also  interesting  because  they  attest  the  attach- 
ment of  Paul  to  the  Jewish  people.  Where  is  there  a  nobler  ex- 
pression of  patriotism  than  Rom.  9:1-5?  Exclusive  attention  to 
the  polemic  passages  where  Paul  is  defending  the  Gentile  mission 
and  denying  the  efficacy  of  the  Mosaic  law,  have  produced  in  the 
minds  of  some  scholars  a  one-sided  view  of  Paul's  attitude  toward 
Israel.     Paul  did  not  advocate  the  destruction  of  the  identity  of  his 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  SALVATION  119 

people.  He  believed  that  even  the  natural  Israel  had  a  part  to  play 
on  the  stage  of  history.  These  chapters  of  Romans,  together  with 
some  other  passages  in  the  epistles,  such  as  I  Cor.  9  :  20,  confirm  what 
the  Book  of  The  Acts  tells  us  about  Paul's  willingness,  when  no 
principle  was  involved,  to  conform  to  Jewish  custom. 

5.  INTEGRITY  OF  THE  EPISTLE 

The  genuineness  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  undoubted,  but 
its  "integrity"  has  been  questioned.  The  epistle  was  certainly 
written  by  Paul,  but  was  it  all,  as  we  now  have  it,  originally  part 
of  one  letter?  By  many  scholars  the  greater  part  of  the  sixteenth 
chapter  is  supposed  to  have  originally  formed  part  of  an  epistle  of 
Paul  written  not  to  Rome  but  to  Ephesus.  The  chief  argument  for 
this  hypothesis  is  derived  from  the  long  list  of  names  in  ch.  16:  3-15. 
Could  Paul  have  had  so  many  personal  acquaintances  in  a  church 
which  he  had  never  visited?  The  argument  is  not  conclusive. 
Just  because  Paul  could  not  appeal  in  his  letter  to  any  personal 
acquaintance  with  the  Roman  church  as  a  whole,  it  would  be  natural 
for  him  to  mention  at  least  all  the  individuals  in  the  church  with 
whom  he  stood  in  any  sort  of  special  relation.  Furthermore,  the 
frequency  of  travel  in  the  Roman  Empire  must  be  borne  in  mind. 
Many  persons  whom  Paul  had  met  on  his  travels  would  naturally 
find  their  way  to  the  capital.  Finally,  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  though 
they  had  recently  lived  in  Ephesus,  I  Cor.  16  :  19,  may  easily  have 
resumed  their  former  residence  in  Rome.     Acts  18  :  2 ;  Rom.  16  : 3-5. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
226-231.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves,  (supplemented) 
article  on  "Romans,  Epistle  to  the."  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the 
Bible":  Robertson,  article  on  "Romans,  Epistle  to  the."  M'Clymont, 
"The  New  Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  77-82.  Gifford,  "The 
Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans."  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament 
Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  193-280:  Sanday, 
"The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Romans."  "The  Cambridge 
Bible  for  Schools":  Moule,  "The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the 
Romans."  "The  International  Critical  Commentary":  Sanday  and 
Headlam,  "A  Critical  and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  i, 
PP-  352-438.  The  two  last-named  works  presuppose  a  knowledge  of 
Greek. 


LESSON  XXII 
PAUL'S  JOURNEY  TO  ROME 


The  material  of  this  lesson  is  so  extensive  that  only  the  barest 
summary  can  be  attempted  in  the  class.  The  great  features  of  the 
narrative  should  be  made  to  stand  out  clear — the  bitter  opposition 
of  the  Jews,  the  favorable  attitude  of  the  Roman  authorities,  the 
journey  to  Rome.  Before  the  lesson  is  over  the  student  should  have 
a  deeper  impression  of  the  character  of  Paul — his  perfect  ease  and 
tactfulness  in  the  various  relations  of  life,  his  unswerving  boldness 
where  the  gospel  was  concerned,  his  inexplicable  power.  Finally, 
the  peculiar  quality  of  the  narrative  should  be  appreciated.  These 
chapters  contain  the  two  longer  "we-sections"  of  The  Acts. 

1.  THE  JOURNEY  TO  TROAS 

At  first  Paul  had  intended  to  sail  direct  from  Corinth  to  Syria,  but 
a  plot  of  the  Jews  caused  him  to  change  his  plan.  Acts  20  :  3.  It 
has  been  suggested  that  the  ship  upon  which  he  was  intending  to  sail 
may  have  carried  non-Christian  Jews,  going  to  the  approaching 
feast  in  Jerusalem,  v.  16,  who  could  have  done  him  harm  upon  the 
voyage.  By  choosing  the  route  through  Macedonia  he  averted  the 
immediate  danger. 

The  use  of  the  first  person  plural  begins  again  at  Acts  20  :  5.  It 
was  broken  off  at  ch.  16: 17.  Luke  had  parted  from  Paul  at  Philippi 
on  the  second  missionary  journey;  and  it  is  at  Philippi  that  he 
now  appears  again.  The  following  journeys,  in  which  Luke  him- 
self took  part,  are  narrated  with  the  utmost  vividness  and  minute- 
ness. The  narrative  amounts  practically  to  a  diary — in  some 
sections  every  day  is  accounted  for. 

The  departure  from  Philippi  took  place  "after  the  days  of  un- 
leavened bread,"  that  is,  after  the  passover  week.  Acts  20  :  6. 
From  the  account  of  the  subsequent  journey  it  is  not  quite 
possible  to  tell  whether  Paul  actually  succeeded  in  carrying  out 
his  plan  of  being  in  Jerusalem  at  Pentecost.  Pentecost,  it  will  be 
remembered,  came  fifty  days  after  the  beginning  of  the  passover 
week. 

120 


PAUL'S  JOURNEY  TO  ROME  121 

2.  TROAS 

The  description  of  the  last  evening  at  Troas,  when  Paul  pro- 
longed his  discourse  in  the  lighted  room,  is  one  of  the  inimitably 
vivid  scenes  of  The  Acts.  Probably  we  are  to  understand  that 
Eutychus,  who  fell  down  from  a  window  in  the  third  story,  was 
really  killed  and  not  merely  stunned.  Verse  10  might  seem  to 
indicate  that  he  was  only  stunned,  but  the  last  words  of  v.  9  point 
rather  to  actual,  and  not  merely  apparent,  death.  The  miracle  is 
paralleled  by  the  raising  of  Dorcas  by  Peter.     Acts  9  :  36-42. 

3.  THE  ELDERS  OF  EPHESUS 

When  Paul  told  the  elders  that  they  would  see  his  face  "no  more," 
or  perhaps  rather  "no  longer,"  Acts  20  :  25,  38,  he  did  not  necessarily 
mean  that  he  would  certainly  never  return  to  Ephesus.  For  a  period 
of  years,  at  any  rate,  he  was  intending  to  transfer  his  labors  to  the 
west;  his  return  to  Ephesus,  therefore,  was  at  all  events  uncertain. 
His  long  activity  at  Ephesus,  which  had  occupied  the  better  part  of 
the  past  three  years,  was  for  the  present  at  an  end.  From  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  it  appears  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  Paul  did  visit 
Ephesus  again  after  his  release  from  the  first  Roman  imprisonment. 

4.  ARRIVAL  IN  PALESTINE 

At  Tyre  and  at  Caesarea,  Paul  received  warnings  against  visiting 
Jerusalem.  These  warnings  came  through  the  Spirit,  Acts  21  : 4, 
11,  but  not  in  the  sense  that  the  Holy  Spirit  commanded  Paul  not 
to  go.  The  meaning  is  that  the  Spirit  warned  him  of  the  dangers 
that  were  to  befall  him.  In  meeting  these  dangers  bravely  he  was 
acting  in  full  accordance  with  the  divine  will. 

At  Acts  21  :  18  the  use  of  the  first  person  plural  ceases,  because 
Luke  had  no  immediate  part  in  the  events  that  followed.  It  is 
natural  to  suppose,  however,  that  he  remained  in  Palestine,  for  he 
joined  Paul  again  in  Caesarea,  at  the  beginning  of  the  journey  to 
Rome.  For  the  events  of  Paul's  imprisonment  in  Jerusalem  and  in 
Caesarea  he  had  first-hand  information. 

The  vow  in  which  Paul  took  part  at  the  request  of  James  was  at 
least  similar  to  the  Nazirite  vow  described  in  Num.  6  :  1-21.  Not 
all  the  details  of  such  vows  are  perfectly  clear.  Paul  himself,  on 
his  own  account,  had  assumed  a  similar  vow  on  his  second  missionary 
journey,  Acts  18  :  18 — unless  indeed,  as  is  grammatically  possible, 
the  words  in  that  passage  refer  to  Aquila  rather  than  to  Paul. 

It  was  not  true,  as  the  Christians  of  Judea  had  been  led  to  think, 


122  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

that  Paul  taught  the  Jewish  Christians  of  the  disperson  to  forsake 
the  law  of  Moses,  though  he  was  insistent  that  the  Gentile  Christians 
must  not  adopt  that  law.  It  was  not  even  true  that  he  himself  had 
altogether  given  up  keeping  the  law,  though  the  exigencies  of  his 
,Gentile  work  required  him  to  give  it  up  very  often,  and  though  he 
regarded  himself  as  inwardly  free  from  the  law.  His  willingness  to 
take  part  in  a  Jewish  vow  in  Jerusalem  is  therefore  not  surprising. 
His  action  on  this  occasion  was  fully  justified  by  the  principles  of 
his  conduct  as  described  in  I  Cor.  9  :  20,  21.  The  keeping  of  the 
law  was  not  for  Paul  a  means  of  obtaining  salvation.  Salvation  was 
a  free  gift  of  God,  through  the  death  of  Christ.  But  for  the  present 
the  general  relinquishment  of  the  law  and  abandonment  of  the  dis- 
tinctive customs  of  Judaism  on  the  part  of  Jewish  Christians  was  not 
required.  Paul  was  willing  to  leave  that  question  to  the  future 
guidance  of  God. 

It  is  somewhat  surprising  that  the  Book  of  The  Acts  mentions  the 
great  collection  for  the  Jerusalem  church  only  incidentally,  in  the 
report  of  a  speech  of  Paul.  Acts  24  :  17.  The  interest  of  Luke  in 
this  part  of  the  narrative  is  absorbed  in  the  relations  between  Paul 
and  the  non-Christian  Jews  and  the  Roman  authorities.  The 
internal  affairs  of  the  Church  are  left  for  the  most  part  out  of 
account.  The  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epistles,  here  as  so  often,  must 
be  allowed  to  supplement  each  other.  Luke  gives  a  vivid  picture 
of  the  external  events,  and  a  clear  view  of  the  relations  of  Chris- 
tianity to  the  outside  world ;  while  Paul  affords  us  a  deeper  insight, 
in  some  respects  at  least,  into  the  inward  development  of  the 
Church's  life. 

5.  PAUL  BEFORE  AGRIPPA 

The  famous  reply  of  Agrippa  to  Paul,  Acts  26  :  28,  is  exceedingly 
difficult  to  translate  and  to  interpret.  The  translation  in  the 
Revised  Version  is  by  no  means  certainly  correct.  The  words  may 
mean,  "A  little  more  of  this  persuasion  will  make  me  a  Christian!" 
or  else,  "You  seem  to  think  that  the  little  persuasion  you  have  used 
is  sufficient  to  make  me  a  Christian."  In  any  case,  the  sentence 
displays  a  certain  perplexity  on  the  part  of  the  king.  He  certainly 
does  not  mean  that  he  is  on  the  point  of  accepting  Christianity — 
his  words  have  a  half-ironical  tone — but  on  the  other  hand  his  in- 
terest is  aroused.  The  same  thing  is  probably  to  be  said  for  Festus. 
He  said,  "Paul,  thou  art  mad;  thy  much  learning  is  turning  thee 
mad,"  but  he  said  it  with  a  loud  voice  as  though  he  were  agitated. 
There  was  something  uncanny  about  this  prisoner! 


PAUL'S  JOURNEY  TO  ROME  123 

6.  THE  ACCESSION  OF  FESTUS 

The  dates  of  many  events  in  the  apostolic  age  have  usually  been 
fixed  by  counting  from  the  accession  of  Festus.  Unfortunately, 
however,  that  event  itself  cannot  be  dated  with  certainty.  Some 
put  it  as  late  as  A.  D.  61,  others  as  early  as  A.  D.  55.  If  the  date 
A.  D.  60  be  provisionally  adopted,  then  Paul's  arrest  in  Jerusalem 
occurred  in  A.  D.  58,  and  his  arrival  in  Rome  in  A.  D.  61.  The 
conclusion  of  the  narrative  in  The  Acts  would  then  fall  in  the  year 
A.  D.  63.  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  proconsulship  of  Gallio  now 
affords  an  additional  starting  point  for  a  chronology  of  the  apostolic 

7.  LATER  HISTORY  OF  THE  JERUSALEM  CHURCH 

After  the  meeting  between  Paul  and  James,  which  is  narrated  in 
Acts  21  :  17-26,  the  Jerusalem  church,  at  least  so  far  as  any  direct 
narrative  is  concerned,  disappears  from  the  pages  of  the  New 
Testament.  It  will  be  observed  that  in  the  account  of  Paul's  last 
visit,  only  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  and  "the  elders"  are  men- 
tioned as  representatives  of  the  church.  Possibly  some  of  the 
twelve  apostles  may  be  included  under  the  term  "elders,"  but  it  is 
also  perfectly  possible  that  the  apostles  were  all  out  of  the  city. 

James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  continued  to  be  the  head  of  the 
Jerusalem  church  until  he  was  martyred — in  A.  D.  62,  or,  as  others 
suppose,  in  A.  D.  66.  Before  the  war  which  culminated  in  the  cap- 
ture of  Jerusalem  in  A.  D.  70,  the  Christians  of  the  city  fled  to  Pella 
beyond  the  Jordan.  From  that  time  on,  though  the  Christians 
returned  after  the  war,  Jewish  Christianity  was  quite  uninfluential. 
The  supremacy  of  the  Jerusalem  church  was  gone.  But  that  church 
had  already  rendered  a  priceless  service.  It  had  laid  the  foundations 
of  Christendom.  It  had  sent  forth  the  first  missionaries.  And  it 
had  preserved  the  record  of  Jesus'  life.  The  Synoptic  Gospels,  in 
substance  at  least,  are  a  product  of  the  Jerusalem  church. 


In  The  Library — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  160-166,  231-239.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on  the 
many  persons  and  places  mentioned  in  the  narrative,  especially  "Felix," 
"Festus,"  and  "Herod"  (4).  Ramsay,  "St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  the 
Roman  Citizen,"  pp.  283-362;  "Pictures  of  the  Apostolic  Church,"  pp. 
270-285,  310-364.  Lewin,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  vol.  ii, 
chs.  ii,  iii,  iv,  v,  and  vi.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The  Life  and 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  chs.  xx,  xxi,  xxii,  xxiii,  xxiv  and  xxv.  Stalker, 
"The  Life  of  St.  Paul,"  pp.  121-133.  Lumby,  pp.  266-380.  Cook,  pp. 
485-534.     Plumptre,  pp.  136-184.     Rackham,  pp.  370-5*3- 


LESSON  XXIII 

THE  SUPREMACY  OF  CHRIST 


1.  THE  EPISTLES  OF  THE  THIRD  GROUP 

With  the  lesson  for  to-day,  we  are  introduced  to  the  third  group 
among  the  epistles  of  Paul.  The  epistles  of  the  second  group,  which 
were  written  during  the  third  missionary  journey,  are  concerned 
with  the  problem  of  sin  and  salvation;  the  epistles  of  the  third  group 
are  interesting  especially  for  their  teaching  about  the  person  of 
Christ  and  about  the  Church.  A  period  of  about  three  or  four  years 
separates  the  last  epistle  of  the  second  group  from  the  first  epistle  of 
the  third.  Most  of  this  interval  had  been  spent  by  Paul  in  captivity. 
Undoubtedly,  during  this  period  of  enforced  leisure,  there  had  been 
development  in  Paul's  thinking,  but  it  is  very  difficult  to  determine 
exactly  wherein  that  development  consisted.  The  differences  of  the 
third  group  of  epistles  from  the  second  are  due  to  the  difference  in 
the  readers  at  least  as  much  as  to  a  difference  in  Paul  himself.  It  is 
hard  to  say  just  how  much  of  Colossians  and  Ephesians  Paul  would 
have  been  incapable  of  writing  during  the  third  missionary  journey. 

At  any  rate,  the  epistles  of  the  captivity  differ  from  those  of  the 
former  group  in  being  for  the  most  part  quieter  in  tone.  During  the 
third  journey  Paul  had  had  to  continue  the  great  battles  of  his 
career  against  various  forms  of  Judaizing  error.  Christianity  at  one 
time  seemed  to  be  in  danger  of  being  reduced  to  a  mere  form  of 
Judaism;  the  free  grace  of  God  was  being  deserted  for  a  law  religion; 
faith  was  being  deserted  for  works.  In  Galatia,  the  question  of 
principle  had  been  uppermost;  in  Corinth,  the  personal  attack  upon 
Paul.  Everywhere,  moreover,  the  gospel  of  salvation  by  faith  was 
exposed  to  misconception.  Pagan  license  was  threatening  to  creep 
into  the  Church.  Unless  it  could  be  kept  out,  the  legalists  would 
have  some  apparent  show  of  reason  on  their  side.  Taking  it  all  in 
all,  it  had  been  a  hard  battle.  But  it  had  been  gloriously  fought,  and 
it  had  been  won.  Now  Paul  was  able  to  turn  his  attention  to  new 
fields  of  labor  and  to  new  problems. 

2.  THE  CHRISTOLOGY  OF  COLOSSIANS 

The  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  is  peculiarly  "Christological." 
More  fully  and  more  expressly  than  in  any  other  of  his  letters  Paul 

124 


THE  SUPREMACY  OF  CHRIST  125 

here  develops  his  view  about  the  person  of  Christ.  Even  here,  how- 
ever, this  teaching  is  incidental;  it  was  simply  Paul's  way  of  refuting 
certain  errors  that  had  crept  into  the  Colossian  church.  Except 
for  those  errors  Paul  would  perhaps  never  have  written  at  length,  as 
he  does  in  Col.  1  :  14-23,  about  the  relation  of  Christ  to  God  and  to 
the  world.  Yet  in  that  case  his  own  views  would  have  been  the 
same,  and  they  would  have  been  just  as  fundamental  to  his  whole 
religious  life.  In  the  epistles,  which  are  written  to  Christians,  Paul 
takes  many  things  for  granted.  Some  of  the  things  which  are  most 
fundamental  appear  only  incidentally.  Just  because  they  were 
fundamental,  just  because  they  were  accepted  by  everyone,  they 
did  not  need  to  be  discussed  at  length. 

So  it  is  especially  with  the  person  of  Christ.  From  the  first 
epistle  to  the  last,  Paul  presupposes  essentially  the  same  view  of 
that  great  subject.  Practically  everything  that  he  says  in  Colossians 
could  have  been  inferred  from  scattered  hints  in  the  earlier  epistles. 
From  the  beginning  Paul  regarded  Jesus  Christ  as  a  man,  who  had  a 
real  human  life  and  died  a  real  death  on  the  cross.  From  the  be- 
ginning, on  the  other  hand,  he  separated  Christ  sharply  from  men 
and  placed  him  clearly  on  the  side  of  God.  From  the  beginning,  in 
other  words,  he  attributed  to  him  a  double  nature — Jesus  Christ 
was  always  in  Paul's  thinking  both  God  and  man.  Finally,  the 
preexistence  of  Christ,  which  is  so  strongly  emphasized  in  Colossians, 
is  clearly  implied  in  such  passages  as  Gal.  4:4;  and  his  activity  in 
creation  appears,  according  to  the  best-attested  text,  in  I  Cor.  8  :  6. 

Nevertheless,  the  more  systematic  exposition  in  Colossians  is  of 
the  utmost  value.  It  serves  to  summarize  and  explain  the  scattered 
implications  of  the  earlier  epistles.  Christ  according  to  Paul  is,  in 
the  first  place,  "the  image  of  the  invisible  God."  Col.  1  :  15.  He 
is  the  supreme  Revealer  of  God,  a  Revealer,  however,  not  merely  by 
words  but  by  his  own  nature.  If  you  want  to  know  what  God  is, 
look  upon  Christ!  In  the  second  place,  he  is  "the  firstborn  of  all 
creation."  Of  itself  that  phrase  might  be  misconstrued.  It  might 
be  thought  to  mean  that  Christ  was  the  first  being  that  God  created. 
Any  such  interpretation,  however,  is  clearly  excluded  by  the  three 
following  verses.  There  Paul  has  himself  provided  an  explanation 
of  his  puzzling  phrase.  "The  firstborn  of  all  creation"  means  that 
Christ,  himself  uncreated,  existed  before  all  created  things;  he  was 
prior  to  all  things,  and,  as  befits  an  only  son,  he  possesses  all  things. 
Indeed  he  himself  was  active  in  the  creation  of  all  things,  not  only 
the  world,  and  men,  but  also  those  angelic  powers — "thrones  or 


126  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

dominions  or  principalities  or  powers" — upon  whom  the  errorists  in 
Colossae  were  inclined  to  lay  too  much  emphasis.  He  was  the  in- 
strument of  God  the  Father  in  creation.  And  he  was  also  the  end 
of  creation.  The  world  exists  not  for  its  own  sake,  but  for  the  sake 
of  Christ.  Especially  is  he  the  Head  of  the  Church.  His  headship 
is  declared  by  his  being  the  first  to  rise  from  the  dead  into  that 
glorious  life  into  which  he  will  finally  bring  all  his  disciples.  In  a 
word,  the  entire  "fulness"  of  the  divine  nature  dwells  in  Christ. 
That  word  "fulness"  was  much  misused  in  the  "Gnostic"  specula- 
tions of  the  second  century.  It  is  barely  possible  that  the  word  had 
already  been  employed  in  the  incipient  Gnosticism  of  the  Colossian 
errorists.  If  so,  Paul  by  his  repeated  use  of  the  word  in  Colossians 
and  Ephesians,  is  bringing  his  readers  back  to  a  healthier  and  simpler 
and  grander  conception. 

3.  THE  PERSON  OF  CHRIST  AND  THE  WORK  OF  CHRIST 

In  Col.  1  :  20-23,  Paul  bases  upon  the  preceding  exposition  of  the 
nature  of  Christ  a  noble  description  of  Christ's  work.  The  work 
which  has  been  intrusted  to  Christ  is  nothing  less  than  that  of 
reconciling  the  creation  unto  God.  Through  sin,  an  enmity  had 
been  set  up  between  God  and  the  work  of  his  hands.  That  enmity 
applies  primarily  of  course  to  the  sinful  persons  themselves.  They 
are  under  God's  wrath  and  curse.  Sin  is  not  a  trifle.  It  cannot 
simply  be  treated  as  though  it  had  never  been.  If  God  be  righteous, 
then  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  moral  order.  The  wrath  of  God  rests 
upon  the  sinner.  But  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  that  enmity  has 
been  wiped  out.  Christ  has  paid  the  awful  penalty  of  sin.  Christ 
has  brought  the  sinner  again  near  to  God.  The  enmity  and  the 
following  reconciliation  concern  primarily  the  men  who  have  sinned. 
But  they  also  apply  to  the  whole  world.  The  ground  has  been 
cursed  for  man's  sake.  The  end  of  the  reconciliation  will  be  a  new 
heaven  and  a  new  earth.  The  groaning  and  travailing  of  the  crea- 
tion will  one  day  have  an  end.     Compare  Rom.  8  :  18-25. 

This  brief  description  of  the  work  of  Christ  in  Col.  1  :  20-22; 
2  :  10-15,  can  be  richly  paralleled  in  the  earlier  epistles.  What  now 
needs  to  be  emphasized  is  that  the  Pauline  view  of  Christ's  work 
depends  absolutely  upon  the  Pauline  view  of  Christ's  person. 
All  through  the  epistles  of  Paul  the  life  and  death  and  resurrection 
are  represented  as  events  of  a  cosmic  significance.  But  they  can 
have  such  significance  only  if  Christ  is  the  kind  of  being  that  is 
described  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.     The  glorious  account  of 


THE  SUPREMACY  OF  CHRIST  127 

salvation,  which  runs  all  through  the  epistles  and  forms  the  especial 
subject  of  the  second  group,  is  unintelligible  if  Christ  were  merely  an 
inspired  prophet  or  merely  the  greatest  of  created  things.  It  be- 
comes intelligible  only  if  Christ  is  "the  image  of  the  invisible  God, 
the  firstborn  of  all  creation."  The  mysterious  Christology  of 
Colossians  lies  at   the  very  heart  of  Christian  faith. 

4.  THE  EPISTLE  TO  PHILEMON 

The  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  though  addressed  to  a  church  that 
Paul  had  never  visited,  is  full  of  warm-hearted  affection.  Paul  could 
hardly  have  been  cold  and  formal  if  he  had  tried.  He  was  a  man  of 
great  breadth  of  sympathy.  Hence  he  was  able  to  enter  with  the 
deepest  interest  into  the  problems  of  the  Colossian  Christians — to 
rejoice  at  their  faith  and  love,  to  lament  their  faults,  and  to  labor 
with  whole-souled  devotion  for  their  spiritual  profit. 

The  simple,  unconstrained  affection  of  Paul's  nature,  however,  had 
freer  scope  in  the  delightful  little  letter  to  Philemon.  Philemon 
apparently  was  a  convert  of  Paul  himself.  Philem.  19.  He  was  not 
a  man  with  whom  Paul  had  to  be  on  his  guard.  Paul  is  perfectly 
confident  that  Philemon  will  fully  understand  the  motives  of  his 
action  and  of  his  letter. 

The  letter  is  addressed  to  Philemon  primarily,  but  also  to  Apphia 
and  to  Archippus  and  to  the  church  in  Philemon's  house.  We  are 
here  introduced  into  a  Christian  household  of  the  apostolic  age. 
Apphia  was  probably  Philemon's  wife  and  Archippus  perhaps  his 
son.  Evidently  Archippus  held  some  sort  of  office  in  the  Colossian 
church.  "Say  to  Archippus,"  says  Paul  in  a  strangely  emphatic  way, 
at  the  very  end  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  "Take  heed  to  the 
ministry  which  thou  hast  received  in  the  Lord,  that  thou  fulfill  it." 
We  should  like  to  know  what  the  ministry  was  which  Archippus  had 
received.  At  any  rate,  we  hope  that  he  fulfilled  it.  It  was  a  solemn 
warning  which  he  received — a  warning  which  might  well  have  made 
him  tremble.  We  also  may  well  take  the  warning  to  heart.  Our 
task  of  imparting  Bible  truth  is  no  light  responsibility.  To  us  also 
the  warning  comes,  "Take  heed  to  the  ministry  which  thou  hast 
received  in  the  Lord,  that  thou  fulfill  it." 

The  letter  is  addressed  not  only  to  Philemon  and  his  family,  but 
also  to  the  "church"  which  met  in  his  house.  This  "church"  was  a 
part  of  the  Colossian  congregation.  In  the  early  days,  when  it  was 
difficult  to  secure  meeting  places,  well-to-do  Christians  frequently 
offered  the  hospitality  of  their  own  homes.     A  certain  Nympha  or 


128  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

Nymphas — the  name  varies  in  the  manuscripts — performed  this 
service  in  Laodicea,  Col.  4  :  15,  Aquila  and  Priscilla  in  Corinth, 
I  Cor.  16  :  19,  and  also  Gaius  in  the  same  city.     Rom.  16  :  23. 

The  Epistle  to  Philemon  exhibits  that  perfection  of  courtesy  and 
delicacy  of  feeling  which  has  been  observed  again  and  again  in  Paul. 
A  man  of  coarser  feeling  might  have  kept  Onesimus  with  him  until 
receiving  the  response  of  Philemon.  In  that  case  no  doubt  Philemon 
would  have  replied  not  only  that  Onesimus  was  forgiven,  but  that 
Paul  might  retain  the  benefit  of  his  services.  But  Paul  saw  clearly 
that  that  would  have  made  Philemon's  goodness  seem  to  be  of 
necessity  and  not  of  free  will.  Philem.  14.  There  was  only  one 
really  fine,  honorable,  high-toned  way  of  dealing  with  the  situation, 
and  that  was  the  way  which  Paul  adopted. 

The  letter  is  informal  and  affectionate.  There  is  even  apparently 
a  little  delicate  play  on  the  name  Onesimus,  which  means  "helpful." 
Once  Onesimus  belied  his  name,  but  now  he  has  become  helpful 
again.  Philem.  11.  In  v.  20,  also,  where  Paul  says,  "Let  me  have 
joy  of  thee,"  he  uses  a  word  which  comes  from  the  same  root  as  that 
which  appears  in  the  name  of  the  slave.  Nevertheless,  despite  all 
informality,  Paul  has  succeeded,  here  as  always,  in  lifting  the  matter 
to  a  lofty  plane.  Paul  was  a  man  who  ennobled  everything  that  he 
touched. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
241-246.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  articles  on  "Colossi," 
"Hierapolis"  and  "Laodicea":  Purves,  articles  on  "Colossians,  Epistle 
to  the"  and  "Philemon"  (supplemented).  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of 
the  Bible":  Ramsay,  articles  on  "Colossae,"  "Hierapolis,"  and 
"Laodicea";  Murray,  article  on  "Colossians,  Epistle  to  the";  Bernard, 
articles  on  "Philemon,"  and  "Philemon,  Epistle  to."  M'Clymont, 
"The  New  Testament  and  Its  Writers,  pp.  91-98.  Ellicott,  "A  New 
Testament  Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol.  iii:  Barry,  "The 
Epistles  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Ephesians,  Philippians,  and  Colos- 
sians," pp.  1-8,  96-124;  "The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  Philemon,"  pp.  265-274. 
"The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges":  Moule,  "The  Epistles 
to  the  Colossians  and  to  Philemon."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New 
Testament,"  vol.  i,  pp.  439-479.  Lightfoot,  "Saint  Paul's  Epistles  to 
the  Colossians  and  to  Philemon."  The  two  last-named  works  are  in- 
tended primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can 
also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XXIV 
THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST 


The  special  effort  in  the  lessons  of  the  second  quarter  has  been  to 
produce  some  lively  impression  of  the  wonderful  variety  among  the 
letters  of  Paul.  That  variety  is  due  largely  to  the  variety  in  the 
occasions  of  the  letters.  Just  because  Paul  entered  with  such 
sympathy  into  the  varying  circumstances  of  his  many  churches, 
the  letters  of  Paul  reflect  the  wonderful  manifoldness  of  life. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  also  an  advantage  that  at  least  one  letter  is 
largely  independent  of  any  special  circumstances  whatever.  This 
is  the  case  with  the  epistle  which  is  to  be  studied  to-day.  The 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  addressed  to  a  definite  group  of  churches, 
but  that  group  is  addressed  not  with  regard  to  its  own  special 
problems,  but  simply  as  representative  of  Gentile  Christianity  in 
general.  For  once  Paul  allows  his  thoughts  to  flow  unchecked  by  the 
particular  needs  of  his  readers. 

1.  STYLE  OF  EPHESIANS 

The  purpose  of  Ephesians,  therefore,  is  quite  different  from  the 
purpose  of  any  other  of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  To  the  difference  in 
purpose  corresponds  a  difference  in  style.  The  style  of  Ephesians 
is  characterized  especially  by  long  sentences,  heaped  full  of  an  almost 
bewildering  wealth  of  thought.  This  characteristic  had  appeared  to 
some  extent  even  in  the  earliest  epistles — compare  II  Thess.  1  : 
3-10 — but  in  Ephesians  it  becomes  more  pronounced.  Ephesians 
1  :  3-14,  for  example,  is  only  one  sentence,  but  it  is  a  world  in  itself. 
Apparently  in  this  epistle  Paul  has  allowed  his  mind  and  heart  to 
roam  unchecked  over  the  whole  realm  of  the  divine  economy.  This 
freedom  might  conceivably  be  thought  to  involve  a  sacrifice  of 
logical  symmetry  and  of  euphonic  grace,  but  at  any  rate  it  possesses 
a  certain  beauty  and  value  of  its  own.  Ephesians  may  lack  the 
splendid  rhythm  of  the  first  chapter  of  First  Corinthians  or  the 
eighth  chapter  of  Romans,  but  on  the  other  hand  these  tremendous 
periods,  with  their  heaping-up  of  majestic  phrases,  serve  admirably 
to  express  the  bewilderment  of  the  soul  in  the  presence  of  divine 
wonders.  Human  language  is  inadequate  to  do  full  justice  to  the 
grace  of  God.     In  Ephesians,  we  see  an  inspired  apostle  striving  to 

Sea.  T.  III.  2.  I2g 


130  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

give  utterance  in  human  language  to  things  which  in  their  full 
reality  are  unspeakable. 

2.  COLOSSIANS  AND  EPHESIANS 

The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  strikingly  similiar  to  the  Epistle 
to  the  Colossians,  not  only  in  thought,  but  also  in  many  details  of 
language.  Another  case  of  striking  similarity  between  two  epistles 
of  Paul  was  encountered  in  First  and  Second  Thessalonians.  There 
the  two  similiar  letters  were  written  both  to  the  same  church,  though 
at  no  very  great  interval  of  time.  The  similiarity  was  due  to  the 
desire  which  Paul  felt  of  reiterating,  with  some  additions  and  ex- 
planations, the  teaching  of  his  former  letter.  In  the  case  of 
Ephesians  and  Colossians  the  similarity  is  even  more  easily  explained. 
These  two  epistles  were  written  to  different  churches  at  the  same 
time.  What  more  natural  than  that  the  same  thoughts  and  to 
some  extent  the  same  words  should  appear  in  both?  Only,  the 
teaching  which  in  Colossians  is  directed  against  a  definite  form  of 
error  is  in  Ephesians  reproduced  in  freer,  more  general  form.  The 
relation  between  the  two  epistles  is  somewhat  like  that  which  exists 
between  Galatians  and  Romans.  In  Galatians,  the  doctrine  of 
salvation  by  faith  appears  in  conflict  with  the  opposing  error;  in 
Romans,  the  same  doctrine  finds  expression,  but  this  time  in  quieter, 
more  systematic  development,  after  the  conflict  is  over.  The 
similarity  between  Galatians  and  Romans  is,  however,  not  so  close 
as  that  between  Colossians  and  Ephesians — partly  because  the  con- 
trast of  spirit  is  not  so  striking  in  the  latter  case,  Colossians  being 
far  less  bitterly  polemic  than  Galatians;  and  more  particularly  be- 
cause a  considerable  interval  separates  Romans  from  Galatians, 
whereas  Colossians  and  Ephesians  were  dispatched  by  the  same 
messenger. 

3.  THE  ADDRESS  OF  EPHESIANS.      EPH.  1:  1,  2 

In  the  Student's  Text  Book,  it  has  been  shown  that  the  words 
"at  Ephesus"  in  the  first  verse  may  perhaps  be  no  part  of  what  Paul 
wrote,  but  a  later  addition.  It  cannot  be  claimed,  however,  that 
the  problem  of  the  address  has  been  completely  solved.  Without 
the  words  "at  Ephesus,"  the  address  becomes  very  difficult.  "To 
the  saints  that  are  and  the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus"  hardly  seems  to 
make  sense.  The  Greek  words  might  be  construed  perfectly  well 
to  mean,  "To  the  saints  who  are  also  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus,"  but 
that  is  a  rather  unusual  expression.  The  suggestion  has  been  made 
that  in  the  first  copies  of  the  epistle  a  blank  space  was  left  after  "the 


THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  131 

saints  that  are,"  to  be  filled  in  with  the  names  of  the  particular 
churches  of  the  group  which  is  addressed.  Every  church  among  the 
group  would  thus  receive  a  copy  with  its  own  name  inserted.  The 
hypothesis  is  not  altogether  satisfactory.  Probably  we  shall  simply 
have  to  admit  that  there  is  an  unsolved  problem  here. 

4.  THANKSGIVING    FOR    THE    PLAN    OF    SALVATION.     EPH. 

1  :  3-14 

Before  the  customary  thanksgiving  for  the  Christian  state  of  the 
readers,  Paul  inserts  here,  in  accordance  with  the  nature  of  this 
epistle,  a  general  thanksgiving  for  the  whole  Church,  which  is  applied 
especially  to  the  readers  only  at  the  very  end.  The  passage  contains 
a  wonderful  summary  of  the  whole  of  salvation,  but  it  begins  with 
the  plan  of  God  and  it  closes  with  the  glory  of  God.  God  is  the  be- 
ginning and  end  of  all  things.  His  mysterious  decree  is  the  cause 
of  our  being  chosen  for  salvation,  and  his  own  glory  is  the  ultimate 
object  in  view.  Men  are  often  rebellious  against  such  a  God -centered 
view  of  things.  Predestination  is  an  unpopular  doctrine.  But  it 
was  at  any  rate  the  doctrine  of  Paul,  and  it  lay  at  the  roots  of  his 
experience.  It  is  sometimes  hard  for  us  to  write  God  so  large  in 
our  thoughts.  Because  we  think  of  him  merely  as  a  somewhat 
greater  man,  we  are  inclined  to  reject  the  doctrine  which  attributes 
all  things  to  the  workings  of  his  will  and  to  the  furtherance  of  his 
glory.  If,  however,  we  could  think  of  him,  not  only  as  a  person, 
but  also  as  an  infinite,  eternal  and  holy  person,  then  we  should 
murmur  no  longer,  but  should,  with  Paul,  burst  forth  in  praise  of  the 
inscrutable  wonder  of  his  grace.  The  glory  of  a  merciful  God  has 
involved  for  its  full  unfolding  the  salvation  of  guilty  sinners.  God's 
glory  finds  its  full  expression  only  when  he  is  revealed  as  the  God 
and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

5.  THANKSGIVING  AND   PRAYER   FOR  THE  READERS.     EPH. 

1  :  15  to  2  :  10 

Beginning  with  thanksgiving  for  the  present  faith  and  love  of  the 
readers,  Paul  passes  at  once  to  a  prayer  that  they  may  be  given 
understanding  to  appreciate  the  wonderful  salvation  which  has  been 
celebrated  in  the  preceding  section,  especially  the  mighty  Saviour 
who  has  been  bestowed  upon  the  Church.  Then  the  greatness  of  the 
present  salvation,  not  only  of  Gentiles,  but  also  of  Jews,  is  celebrated 
by  a  contrast  with  the  previous  condition  of  sin  and  misery.  The 
blessed  change  has  been  due,  not  to  anything  in  man,  but  simply  and 
solely  to  the  grace  of  God,  received  by  faith. 


132  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

6.  RECEPTION  OF  THE  GENTILES.     EPH.  2  :  11-22 

Here  the  contrast  between  past  and  present  is  applied  especially 
to  the  Gentiles.  Formerly  they  were  excluded  from  the  people 
of  God.  But  now  by  the  death  of  Christ  the  "middle  wall  of 
partition"  has  been  broken  down.  Gentiles  and  Jews  have  now  a 
common  access  to  the  Father. 

7.  THE  MINISTRY  OF  PAUL.     EPH.,  ch.  3 

This  reception  of  the  Gentiles  is  the  work  that  has  been  intrusted 
especially  to  Paul.  It  is  a  glorious  ministry,  far  too  great  for  human 
strength.  It  can  be  fulfilled  only  through  the  grace  of  God.  The 
full  mystery  of  God's  grace,  concealed  for  many  generations,  has 
at  last  been  revealed.  The  first  half  of  the  epistle  is  fittingly  closed 
by  a  doxology. 

8.  LIFE  IN  THE  CHURCH.     EPH.,  chs.  4  to  6 

This  section  may  be  called  the  practical  part  of  the  epistle.  It 
exhibits  the  results  in  holy  living  which  proceed  from  the  glorious 
gospel  which  has  just  been  proclaimed.  Even  in  the  "practical" 
part,  however,  the  great  doctrines  of  God's  grace  are  so  constantly 
finding  renewed  expression  that  it  is  difficult  to  separate  one  part 
from  the  other.  Paul  never  separated  moral  precepts  from  the 
great  truths  which  give  them  force.  Let  the  readers  live  like  citizens 
of  the  commonwealth  of  God,  and  members  of  the  body  of  Christ! 

Naturally,  in  this  part  of  the  epistle  the  unity  of  the  Church — 
which  is  perhaps  the  central  theme  of  the  whole — is  especially  em- 
phasized. The  first  half  of  the  fourth  chapter,  for  example,  is  a 
magnificent  hymn  to  Christian  unity.  Even  in  the  midst  of  the 
directions  for  the  various  relationships  of  life  the  great  theme  of 
Christ  and  the  Church,  under  the  figure  of  husband  and  wife,  is 
brought  again  into  view. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
246-249.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  and  Davis,  article 
on  "Ephesians,  Epistle  to  the."  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible": 
Lock,  article  on  "Ephesians,  Epistle  to."  M'Clymont,  "The  New 
Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  99-103.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament 
Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol.  iii:  Barry,  "The  Epistles  of 
Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Ephesians,  Philippians,  and  Colossians,"  pp. 
9-60.  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges":  Moule,  "The 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, vol.  i,  pp.  479-522.  Robinson,  "St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians."  The  two  last-named  works  are  intended  primarily  for  those 
who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XXV 
CHRIST  AND  HIS  FOLLOWERS 


The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  is  the  only  one  of  the  letters  of 
Paul  which  is  addressed  to  an  approved  church  with  whom  he  stood 
on  terms  of  untroubled  intimacy  and  affection.  In  Galatians  and 
both  the  Corinthian  epistles,  serious  errors  in  the  churches  addressed, 
as  well  as  unscrupulous  personal  criticism,  lend  a  tone  of  bitterness  to 
the  apostle's  words;  Romans,  Colossians  and  perhaps  "Ephesians" 
are  addressed  to  churches  which  he  had  never  seen.  In  some  ways 
the  little  letter  to  Philemon  is  very  similar  to  Philippians.  Both 
Philippians  and  Philemon  display  the  same  perfect  confidence  in 
the  readers,  the  same  perfection  of  courtesy,  the  same  tone  of  un- 
troubled cordiality.  But  Philemon  is  addressed  primarily  to  an 
individual,  and  Philippians  to  a  church;  Philemon  confines  itself 
almost  exclusively  to  one  little  personal  matter,  while  Philippians 
discusses  a  variety  of  topics.  Among  the  letters  addressed  to 
churches,  perhaps  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  is  more 
similiar  to  Philippians,  at  least  in  tone,  than  is  any  of  the  others. 
Like  Philippians  it  is  animated  by  a  deep  satisfaction  with  the 
readers,  and  a  certain  pleasing  simplicity  of  manner.  But  here 
again  of  course  there  are  wide  differences.  First  Thessalonians  is 
addressed  to  an  infant  church,  which  has  just  passed  through  its 
first  trial,  and  needs  the  most  elementary  instruction;  in  Philippians 
Paul  is  writing  to  old  friends,  to  a  church  which  for  ten  years  has 
endured  bravely  the  hardships  incident  to  the  Christian  profession, 
and  has  shared  in  fullest  sympathy  the  joys  and  sorrows  of  the 
apostle's  life. 

During  the  ten  years,  moreover,  which  have  elapsed  between 
First  Thessalonians  and  Philippians,  there  has  been  a  change  in 
the  apostle  himself,  as  well  as  in  his  readers.  Those  years  of  conflict 
and  labor  and  meditation  and  suffering  have  borne  fruit  in  the 
apostle's  own  thinking.  His  gospel  was  the  same  from  the  beginning, 
but  the  expression  of  it  has  become  richer  and  maturer  and  nobler 
with  the  advancing  years.  Philippians  is  a  wonderful  letter. 
Simplicity  and  profundity  are  here  combined.  This  simple  letter 
of  thanks,  with  its  delicate  courtesy  and  tactful  admonition,  has 

133 


134  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

engaged  the  profoundest  study  of  the  theologians,  and  touched  the 
grandest  chords  of  the  Christian  heart. 

1.  THE  ADDRESS.     Phil.  1  :  1,  2 

The  address  of  Philippians  is  remarkable  because  of  the  mention 
of  bishops  and  deacons,  which  occurs  in  this  way  in  no  other  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles.  Possibly,  as  has  been  suggested,  these  officers  are 
here  mentioned  because  they  had  had  a  special  part  in  sending  the 
gifts  of  the  church.  It  is  important  to  observe  that  there  was  a 
plurality  of  bishops  in  the  Philippian  church.  At  a  later  time, 
when  the  "bishops"  were  exalted  above  the  other  presbyters,  there 
was  only  one  bishop  in  every  church.  In  The  Acts  and  in  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  "bishop"  and  "presbyter"  appear  plainly  as 
nothing  more  than  two  names  for  exactly  the  same  office. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  the  title  "apostle,"  which  appears  at 
the  beginning  of  all  the  other  Pauline  Epistles  addressed  to  churches, 
except  First  and  Second  Thessalonians,  the  two  earliest,  is  lacking 
in  the  address  of  Philippians.  Perhaps  in  writing  to  such  a  devoted 
church  Paul  considered  it  unnecessary  to  mention  his  apostleship 
as  he  had  regularly  done  in  his  epistles  since  the  denial  of  it  in 
Galatia.  On  account  of  the  peculiar  nature  of  the  Philippian  church, 
the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  partakes  somewhat  of  the  informality 
and  intimacy  of  such  a  letter  as  that  to  Philemon,  where  the  title 
is  also  lacking  in  the  address. 

Very  naturally  Timothy  is  associated  with  Paul  in  the  address  of 
the  epistle,  for  he  had  been  one  of  Paul's  companions  in  founding 
the  Philippian  church.  At  what  time  Timothy  had  come  to  Rome 
we  do  not  know.  His  name  appears  also  in  the  address  of  Colossians 
and  of  Philemon.  Luke,  although  he  had  journeyed  with  Paul  to 
Rome,  and  was  in  Rome  at  the  time  when  Colossians  and  Philemon 
were  written,  Col.  4  :  14;  Philem.  24,  was  apparently  absent  at  the 
time  of  Philippians;  for  since  he,  like  Timothy,  had  assisted  in 
founding  the  Philippian  church,  and  perhaps  had  even  remained  in 
Philippi  for  years  after  the  departure  of  the  others,  he  would  probably 
have  been  associated  in  the  address,  or  at  least  would  have  sent 
greetings,  if  he  had  been  at  hand. 

2.  THE  THANKSGIVING.     Phil.  1  :  3-11 

As  might  have  been  expected,  the  thanksgiving  for  the  Christian 
state  of  the  readers  is  in  this  epistle  of  unusual  cordiality.  In  the 
mention  of  their  "fellowship  in  furtherance  of  the  gospel  from  the 


CHRIST  AND  HIS  FOLLOWERS  135 

first  day  until  now,"  there  is  perhaps  a  delicate  allusion  to  the 
material  assistance  which  they  had  sent  him  from  time  to  time  and 
especially  a  little  while  before  the  writing  of  the  letter;  but  such 
material  assistance  was  for  Paul  of  course  not  the  only,  or  even  the 
principal,  manifestation  of  their  fellowship.  Here  as  often,  the 
thanksgiving  runs  over  into  a  prayer — and  this  time  it  is  a  prayer 
of  singular  beauty  and  depth. 

3.  PROGRESS  OF  AFFAIRS  IN  ROME.     Phil.  1  :  12-30 

In  this  section,  Paul  hastens  to  relieve  the  minds  of  his  readers 
about  the  course  of  events  in  Rome.  Even  his  bonds,  and  the 
jealousy  of  certain  preachers,  have  resulted  only  in  the  furtherance 
of  the  gospel.  With  regard  to  the  outcome  of  his  trial,  there  is 
every  reason  to  be  hopeful.  For  his  part  he  would  prefer  to  depart 
and  to  be  with  Christ,  but  there  is  still  work  for  him  to  do.  And 
whether  he  is  present  or  absent,  let  the  Philippians  give  him  joy  by 
living  in  a  manner  worthy  of  the  gospel,  and  by  being  steadfast  in 
the  persecutions  which  are  bound  to  come  to  them  as  well  as  to 
him.  It  is  a  high  privilege  not  only  to  believe  in  Christ,  but  also  to 
suffer  for  him. 

4.  EXHORTATION  TO  UNITY.  Phil.  2  :  1-18 

With  the  utmost  earnestness,  Paul  here  appeals  to  his  readers  to 
keep  their  Christian  life  free  from  selfishness  and  quarreling.  The 
stupendous  "Christological"  passage  of  the  epistle,  vs.  5-11,  which 
has  given  rise  to  endless  discussion,  is  introduced  merely  in  an 
incidental  way,  in  order  to  strengthen  the  apostle's  exhortation. 
So  it  is  frequently  in  the  letters  of  Paul.  The  apostle  was  always  able 
to  make  the  profoundest  verities  of  the  faith  immediately  effective 
in  conduct.  Theology  in  Paul  was  never  divorced  from  practice. 
The  converse  of  the  proposition,  however,  is  also  true.  If  Paul's 
theology  did  not  exist  apart  from  practice,  neither  did  his  practice 
exist  apart  from  theology.  It  is  the  latter  proposition  which  needs 
to  be  emphasized  to-day.  Modern  liberalism  has  sometimes  en- 
deavored to  reproduce  Paul's  religion  apart  from  his  theology;  but 
the  effort  has  resulted  in  failure. 

The  example  of  Christ  which  Paul  holds  up  before  his  readers  is 
briefly  as  follows:  Originally  Christ  not  only  existed  in  the  form  of 
God — that  is,  was  in  full  possession  of  the  divine  attributes — but 
also  lived  in  glory,  in  a  way  befitting  deity.  Instead,  however,  of 
keeping    hold    of    this   heavenly  glory,   he    humbled   himself   by 


136  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

becoming  man.  He  laid  aside,  not  indeed  his  divine  attributes, 
but  the  enjoyment  of  his  divine  glory.  He  who  was  Lord  of  all 
took  the  form  of  a  servant  like  other  men.  And  even  more.  His 
obedience  extended  even  to  death,  and  to  the  shameful  death  of 
the  cross.  But  after  humiliation  came  exaltation.  God  gave  to 
him  a  name  that  is  above  every  name.  At  the  name  of  Jesus 
every  knee  shall  bow,  in  earth  and  in  heaven,  to  the  glory  of  God 
the  Father. 

5.  THE  MISSION  OF  TIMOTHY  AND  OF  EPAPHRODITUS. 
Phil.  2  :  19-30 

The  personal  appeal  with  which  the  preceding  section  closed  leads 
Paul  to  speak  of  the  plans  which  he  has  for  the  comfort  and  help  of 
the  readers.  Timothy  will  be  sent  as  soon  as  the  issue  of  Paul's  trial 
is  definitely  in  view;  Epaphroditus  will  return  to  Philippi  at  once. 

6.  WARNING  AGAINST  OPPONENTS.     Phil.,  ch.  3 

The  men  who  are  rebuked  in  very  vigorous  language  in  the  former 
part  of  this  section  evidently  placed  an  excessive  emphasis  upon 
circumcision  and  connection  with  the  people  of  Israel.  Perhaps 
also  they  were  advocates  of  a  law  righteousness.  V.  9.  The  most 
obvious  suggestion  is  that  they  were  Judaizers  like  those  in  Galatia, 
or  at  least  like  the  opponents  of  Paul  in  Corinth.  Paul's  account 
in  vs.  4-6  of  the  Jewish  advantages,  fully  equal  to  those  of  his 
opponents,  which  he  counts  as  nothing  in  view  of  the  superior  ad- 
vantages of  faith  in  Christ,  is  strikingly  similar  to  II  Cor.  11  :  21, 
22.  If,  however,  Paul  is  here  referring  to  Judaizers,  it  looks  as 
though  they  were  at  least  as  cautious  as  the  opponents  in  Corinth 
about  presenting  the  claims  of  the  law.  At  any  rate,  the  danger 
of  a  legalistic  propaganda  either  in  Philippi  or  in  Rome  does  not 
seem  to  be  very  seriously  in  view.  Apparently  the  acute  stage  of 
the  Judaistic  controversy  is  over.  It  is  possible  that  Paul  is  referring 
to  Jews  rather  than  Jewish  Christians.  We  must  remember  that 
Judaism  in  the  first  century  was  still  an  active  missionary  religion. 
A  Jewish  propaganda,  with  stress  upon  circumcision  and  law  right- 
eousness, might  conceivably  become,  even  in  Philippi,  where  the 
Jews  seem  not  to  have  been  numerous,  a  serious  danger,  if  not  to 
the  stability,  at  least  to  the  rapid  extension,  of  the  Christian  Church. 

Finally,  it  is  uncertain  whether  "the  enemies  of  the  cross  of 
Christ,"  Phil.  3  :  18,  are  the  same  as  those  who  are  combated  in  the 
former  part  of  the  section. 


CHRIST  AND  HIS  FOLLOWERS  137 

Fortunately  these  various  uncertainties  do  not  affect  the  lofty 
teaching  of  this  part  of  the  epistle.  Whoever  the  opponents  were, 
what  Paul  says  in  opposition  to  them  is  the  thing  of  real  value.  In 
the  wonderfully  terse,  complete,  vigorous  description  of  the  Christian 
salvation  and  of  the  Christian  life  which  Paul  gives  in  ch.  3  :  7-14, 
20,  21,  the  long  years  of  the  Judaistic  controversy  have  borne 
glorious  fruit.  The  final,  eternal  truth  of  God,  in  classic  statement, 
has  at  last  emerged  triumphant  from  the  conflict. 

.  7.    EXHORTATION,    ACKNOWLEDGMENT,    GREETINGS   AND 
BENEDICTION.     Phil.,  ch.  4 

The  principal  contents  of  this  section  have  been  discussed  in  the 
Student's  Text  Book.  First  Paul  applies  the  general  exhortation 
to  unity,  Phil.  2  :  1-11,  to  the  case  of  Euodia  and  Syntyche,  and 
adds  certain  other  brief  exhortations.  The  "true  yokefellow"  of 
ch.  4:3  probably  refers  to  Epaphroditus,  the  bearer  of  the  epistle. 
Then,  in  a  characteristically  delicate  and  worthy  manner,  he 
acknowledges  the  gift  of  the  Philippians.  Next,  in  just  a  word,  he 
transmits,  along  with  his  own,  the  greetings  of  his  immediate 
companions,  and  of  the  Roman  church  in  general,  especially  of  those 
members  who  were  connected,  as  slaves  or  officials,  with  the  im- 
mediate service  of  the  emperor.  Finally,  with  a  brief  benediction, 
the  epistle  closes. 


In  The  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
249-251.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  (edited)  article  on 
"Philippians."  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Gibb,  article  on 
"Philippians,  Epistle  to  the."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament 
and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  83-90.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary 
for  English  Readers",  vol.  iii  :  Barry,  "The  Epistles  of  Paul  the  Apostle 
to  the  Ephesians,  Philippians,  and  Colossians,"  pp.  61-90.  "The 
Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges":  Moule,  "The  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians."  ^ahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  i, 
pp.  522-564.  Lightfoot,  "Saint  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians." 
The  two  last-named  works  are  intended  primarily  for  those  who  have 
some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XXVI 
TRAINING  NEW  LEADERS 


The  emphasis  which  the  Pastoral  Epistles  lay  upon  sound  in- 
struction and  upon  orderly  government  is  sometimes  looked  upon 
with  distaste.  Orthodoxy  and  organization  are  thought  to  be  de- 
structive of  religious  fervor.  In  the  New  Testament,  however,  the 
two  aspects  of  the  Church's  life  appear  side  by  side.  In  the  New 
Testament,  enthusiasm  and  sanity  are  united.  And  the  New 
Testament  is  right.  Religion  is  a  concern  of  every  individual  soul — 
the  final  decision  must  be  made  by  every  man  in  the  immediate 
presence  of  his  God — but  normally  no  man  can  do  without  associa- 
tion with  his  fellows.  The  Church  is  a  great  permanent  community. 
It  is  not  merely  an  aggregation,  but  an  institution.  To  break  away 
from  its  restraints  may  be  attractive,  it  may  produce  a  certain 
temporary  impression  of  zeal  and  new  life;  but  in  the  long  run  the 
old  way  is  usually  best. 

The  Pastoral  Epistles,  however,  are  sometimes  thought  to  indi- 
cate an  unfortunate  change  in  Paul  himself  as  well  as  in  the  Church. 
Some  students  would  prefer  to  know  only  the  Paul  of  Galatians  and 
Corinthians  and  Romans.  This  judgment  is  one-sided.  The 
Pastorals  do  not  contradict,  but  supplement,  the  earlier  letters. 
The  earlier  period,  no  doubt,  is  the  more  inspiring;  there  is  nothing 
in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  like  the  first  few  chapters  of  First  Corin- 
thians, or  the  fifth  chapter  of  Second  Corinthians,  or  the  eighth  chap- 
ter of  Romans.  These  passages  are  overpowering  in  the  intensity 
of  their  eloquence;  the  later  letters  are  soberer,  graver,  more 
matter-of-fact.  These  latter  qualities,  however,  are  much  needed 
in  the  Church.  The  Church  needs  enthusiasm;  but  she  also  needs 
gravity  and  sanity.  Her  function  is  not  merely  evangelistic;  it 
is  also  conservative  and  educational.  In  both  functions  Paul  was  a 
leader.  The  quiet  gravity  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  supplements  the 
glories  of  Galatians  and  Romans.  Only  when  these  last  epistles  are 
added  to  the  others  can  the  many-sided  greatness  of  Paul  be  fully- 
appreciated.  Exaggerations,  moreover,  should  be  avoided.  The 
soberness  of  the  Pastorals  is  not  commonplace.  Back  of  the  details 
of  organization,  back  of  the  concern  for  sound  instruction,  there  can 

138 


TRAINING  NEW  LEADERS  I39 

be  detected  throughout  the  glow  of  the  Pauline  gospel.  The  Pas- 
toral Epistles,  like  the  other  letters  of  Paul,  are  a  perennial  fountain 
of  Christian  life. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy  was  clearly  the  last  of  the  extant 
epistles  of  Paul ;  but  the  order  of  First  Timothy  and  Titus  cannot  be 
certainly  determined.  The  difficulty  of  reconstructing  the  history 
implied  by  the  Pastoral  Epistles  reveals  anew  the  supreme  value 
of  The  Acts.  After  the  conclusion  of  the  Lucan  narrative  the 
historian  is  almost  helpless.  From  about  A.  D.  63  on  into  the  second 
century,  the  history  of  the  Church  is  shrouded  in  profound  darkness, 
with  gleams  of  light  only  here  and  there. 

1.  THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO  TIMOTHY 

At  the  time  when  First  Timothy  was  written,  Paul  had  recently 
made  a  journey  to  Macedonia.  I  Tim.  1  :  3.  Perhaps  he  had  gone 
thither  from  Ephesus,  though  the  words  do  not  make  that  perfectly 
clear.  At  any  rate,  he  had  directed  Timothy  to  remain  in  Ephesus, 
where  he  hoped  to  join  him  before  long.  In  case  of  delay,  however, 
he  writes  the  epistle.     Chs.  3  :  14,  15;  4  :  13. 

On  a  previous  occasion,  perhaps  by  word  of  mouth  when  he  had 
been  in  Ephesus,  he  had  warned  Timothy  to  put  a  stop  to  certain 
false  teaching  in  the  Church,  and  the  warning  is  now  reiterated  in 
the  epistle.  The  exact  nature  of  this  teaching  is  somewhat  difficult 
to  determine.  Apparently  it  had  been  concerned  with  the  Jewish 
law.  Ch.  1:7-11.  Compare  Titus  1:10,14.  Like  the  false 
teaching  at  Colossse,  it  seems  not  to  have  been  directly  subversive 
of  the  truth  of  the  gospel.  At  least,  however,  it  diverted  attention 
from  the  great  things  of  the  faith  to  useless  questionings.  I  Tim. 
6  :  4.  The  myths  and  endless  genealogies,  ch.  1  :  4,  compare  4  :  7, 
were  perhaps  elaborations  of  the  Old  Testament  history.  Whether 
the  ascetic  tendency  which  is  combated  in  ch.  4  :  3,  8,  is  connected 
with  this  same  teaching,  is  not  certain,  but  is  on  the  whole  perhaps 
probable. 

The  first  reference  to  the  false  teaching,  ch.  1  :  3-10,  leads  Paul  to 
speak  of  the  norm  by  which  it  could  be  combated.  Vs.  11-20.  That 
norm  was  the  gospel  with  which  he  had  been  intrusted.  The 
bestowal  of  the  gospel  had  changed  him  from  a  blasphemer  and 
persecutor  into  an  apostle.  The  gospel  had  been  bestowed  purely 
by  the  free  grace  of  Christ,  and  its  content  was  the  salvation  which 
Christ  offers.  A  doxology  to  God,  v.  17,  is  natural  whenever  that 
gospel  is  mentioned.     That  gospel  will  overcome  all  error,  and  if 


140  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

attended  to  diligently  will  prevent  disasters  like  that  which  has 
befallen  Hymen?eus  and  Alexander. 

In  the  second  chapter,  Paul  insists  upon  gravity  and  order  in  the 
public  worship  of  the  Church.  In  the  prayers  which  are  to  be 
offered,  the  civil  authority  is  not  to  be  forgotten,  even  though  it  be 
non-Christian.  The  sympathies  of  the  Christian  must  be  broad. 
God  desires  all  men  to  come  to  a  knowledge  of  the  truth. 

The  highest  regular  officers  of  the  Church  are  in  the  third  chapter 
called  "bishops."  It  is  abundantly  evident,  however — especially 
from  Titus  1  :  5,  7 — that  "bishop"  is  only  another  name  for  "presby- 
ter" or  "elder."  At  a  later  time  the  term  "bishop"  was  applied  to 
an  officer  who  had  the  supreme  oversight  over  a  church  and  to 
whom  the  elders  were  subject.  These  conditions  did  not  prevail 
at  the  time  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  At  first  sight,  indeed,  it 
might  seem  as  though  Timothy  and  Titus  themselves  were  "bishops" 
in  the  later  sense  of  the  word.  But  this  also  is  false.  Timothy  and 
Titus  do  not  appear  at  all  as  officers  of  individual  congregations. 
They  had  oversight  over  a  plurality  of  churches,  and  evidently 
their  authority  was  special  and  temporary.  They  did  not  fill  an 
office  which  was  intended  to  become  permanent  in  the  Church,  but 
were  simply  special  representatives  of  the  apostle.  As  the  apostles 
had  no  successors,  so  no  man  after  the  apostolic  age  had  a  right  to 
assume  the  functions  of  Timothy  and  Titus. 

The  fourth  chapter  calls  attention  to  the  revelation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  probably  through  the  lips  of  Christian  prophets,  that  in  the 
future  there  would  appear  apostates  from  the  faith.  The  errorists 
who  are  combated  in  vs.  7-10  are  apparently  to  be  regarded  as  fore- 
runners, still  within  the  Church,  of  the  more  open  apostasy  which  is 
one  day  to  follow. 

The  institution  of  the  "widows,"  which  is  discussed  in  the  fifth 
chapter,  is  to  us  somewhat  obscure.  Evidently  those  who  were 
accounted  "widows,"  being  helpless,  were  entitled  to  support  by  the 
church.  The  necessity  of  sound  teaching,  with  emphasis  upon  the 
really  fundamental  things  of  the  faith,  is  again  insisted  upon;  and 
certain  false  teachers  are  accused  of  practicing  or  inculcating  piety 
as  a  means  of  worldly  gain.  Ch.  6  :  3-10.  The  last  warning  of  the 
epistle  characteristically  concerns  vain  babblings  and  oppositions 
of  a  so-called  knowledge.  Probably  these  errors  are  connected  in 
some  way  with  those  which  are  combated  in  the  first  section  of  the 
epistle.  In  the  final  words,  "Grace  be  with  you,"  the  "you"  in  the 
Greek,  according  to  the  best  attestation,  is  plural;  and  in  the  cor- 


TRAINING  NEW  LEADERS  I4I 

tesponding  passages  at  the  end  of  Titus  and  of  Second  Timothy,  it 
is  certainly  plural.  This  may  furnish  an  indication — to  be  added 
to  more  general  considerations — that  the  Pastoral  Epistles  were 
intended  not  merely  for  those  to  whom  they  are  formally  addressed, 
but  also  to  the  churches  under  their  care. 

2.  THE  EPISTLE  TO  TITUS 

The  address  of  the  Epistle  to  Titus  is  noteworthy  for  the  long 
addition  to  the  title  of  the  author,  which  is  to  be  compared  with  the 
similar  addition  in  Romans. 

At  the  time  when  the  epistle  was  written,  Paul  had  recently  been 
with  Titus  in  Crete.  Paul  had  not  labored  on  that  island  before  the 
first  Roman  imprisonment.  His  journeys  in  the  east  between  the 
two  imprisonments  therefore  involved  something  more  than  the 
revisitation  of  former  fields.  The  reason  why  Titus  was  left  behind 
in  Crete  was  somewhat  similar  to  the  reason  why  Timothy,  accord- 
ing to  First  Timothy,  was  told  to  remain  in  Ephesus.  Titus  was  to 
give  attention  to  organization,  and  to  the  maintenance  of  sound 
instruction. 

Like  Timothy,  Titus  is  given  the  power  of  establishing  presbyters, 
and  of  establishing  them  not  merely  in  one  church  but  in  various 
churches.  The  function  of  the  presbyter  was  that  of  "bishop"  or 
"overseer."  Titus  1  :  5-7.  In  vs.  9-16,  the  close  connection  of 
organization  with  sound  doctrine  becomes  particularly  apparent. 
One  important  function  of  the  presbyters  was  to  counteract  the 
errors  which  were  springing  up.  The  account  of  the  errorists  in 
Crete  is  perhaps  in  some  respects  clearer  than  that  which  is  given 
of  the  related  phenomenon  in  Ephesus.  The  false  teachers  were 
animated  by  a  love  of  gain.  V.  11.  Some  of  them  were  Jews  or 
proselytes.  V.  10.  They  had  a  fondness  for  Jewish  fables.  Ap- 
parently, also,  they  tried  to  atone  for  a  lack  of  real  inward  purity 
by  an  outward  asceticism.  Vs.  15,  16.  They  were  concerned  with 
vain  questionings  and  genealogies  and  legal  disputes.  These  last 
are  perhaps  to  be  regarded  as  casuistic  discussions  like  those  which 
play  such  a  large  part  in  Jewish  tradition. 

The  Epistle  to  Titus  is  somewhat  richer  than  First  Timothy  in 
personal  details.  After  Titus  has  been  relieved  in  Crete  by  Artemas 
or  Tychicus,  who  may  soon  be  sent,  he  is  to  join  Paul  in  Nicopolis. 
Tychicus,  it  will  be  remembered,  had  served  as  Paul's  messenger 
during  the  first  imprisonment.  He  was  the  bearer  of  Colossians 
and  Ephesians.    The  Nicopolis  where  Paul  is  intending  to  pass  the 

Sen.  t.  m.  2. 


142  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

approaching  winter,  is  probably  the  chief  of  the  many  cities  of  that 
name,  the  Nicopolis  in  Epirus.  Zenas,  a  lawyer  otherwise  unknown, 
and  the  well-known  Apollos,  who  appears  so  prominently  in  The 
Acts  and  in  First  Corinthians,  are  to  be  furnished  in  Crete  with 
everything  that  they  need  for  their  further  journey. 

3.  THE  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  TIMOTHY 

The  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  and  the  Epistle  to  Titus  are  in 
many  respects  strikingly  similar.  A  certain  strong  family  resem- 
blance extends  also  to  Second  Timothy.  Evidently  all  three  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  belong  to  the  same  general  period  of  Paul's  life, 
and  were  intended  to  subserve  similar  purposes.  Second  Timothy, 
however,  as  compared  with  the  other  two,  exhibits  some  marked 
peculiarities. 

The  personal  element,  in  particular,  is  in  this  letter  much  more 
prominent.  Second  Timothy  contains  a  wealth  of  interesting 
biographical  details  about  Timothy,  about  Paul,  and  about  a  very 
considerable  number  of  other  persons.  Some  of  these  last  are  known 
only  from  this  epistle;  others  have  been  brought  to  our  attention 
again  and  again. 

In  Second  Timothy  Paul  appears  as  a  prisoner,  no  doubt  at  Rome. 
This  time  there  seems  to  be  little  hope  of  his  release.  Apparently 
his  imprisonment  is  not  of  long  standing.  Only  recently  he  has 
been  at  Corinth  and  at  Miletus.  II  Tim.  4  :  20.  He  speaks  in  one 
place  of  his  first  defense.  V.  16.  Some  suppose  that  this  is  a 
reminiscence  of  the  trial  which  had  taken  place  years  before,  during 
the  first  imprisonment.  More  probably  it  refers  to  some  pre- 
liminary hearing  which  had  only  recently  been  held.  Paul  is 
oppressed  with  a  sense  of  loneliness,  even  more  than  during  the 
first  imprisonment.  There  was  no  one  to  stand  by  him  at  his  first 
hearing.  For  one  reason  or  another,  his  intimate  associates  have 
been  scattered — some  of  them,  no  doubt,  for  good  and  sufficient 
reasons,  but  Demas,  at  any  rate,  out  of  an  unworthy  love  of  the 
world.  Luke,  fortunately,  is  still  with  him;  and  Timothy,  with 
Mark,  is  urged  to  come  before  the  winter.  Vs.  11,  21.  Mark 
seems  to  have  changed  since  he  turned  back  from  the  work  at  Perga. 
At  the  beginning  he  was  rebuked  for  desertion ;  but  now  at  the  end 
he  is  one  of  the  few  faithful  ones. 

It  is  not  quite  clear  where  Timothy  was  when  the  letter  was 
addressed  to  him.  The  greeting  to  Priscilla  and  Aquila  might 
seem  to  point  to  Ephesus.     They  had  lived  there  before;  perhaps 

Sen.  T.  III.  2. 


TRAINING  NEW  LEADERS  143 

they  returned  thither  after  a  residence  in  Rome.  Rom.  16  :  3. 
If  Timothy  was  in  Ephesus,  then  Tychicus,  who  was  sent  thither, 
II  Tim.  4  :  12,  was  probably  expected  to  linger  by  the  way;  other- 
wise his  sending  would  be  no  news  to  the  reader  of  the  letter. 
Something  is  to  be  said,  perhaps,  for  the  view  that  Timothy  was 
not  at  Ephesus,  but  perhaps  at  Lystra,  his  original  home. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy  contains  warnings  against  false 
teaching  similar  to  those  which  appear  in  First  Timothy  and  Titus. 
But  the  characteristic  feature  of  the  letter  is  to  be  found  in  the 
references  to  the  apostle's  own  life.  Even  the  warnings  and  ad- 
monitions are  brought  into  relation  to  these.  Paul  does  not 
hesitate  to  point  to  himself  as  an  example  for  his  beloved  followers. 
He  does  so,  without  a  touch  of  vain  glory,  in  the  simple  consciousness 
of  a  divine  commission.  Second  Timothy  is  a  letter  of  farewell,  in 
which  reminiscence  and  exhortation  are  characteristically  blended. 
It  is  a  farewell  from  the  apostle,  primarily  for  Timothy,  though  he 
is  expecting  to  see  Timothy  again,  but  also  for  all  of  the  Pauline 
churches.  The  letter  has  taken  deep  hold  of  every  generation  in 
the  history  of  the  Church.  The  fitting  end  of  a  life  of  true  service, 
the  calm  facing  of  death,  the  certainty  of  heavenly  communion 
with  the  Lord — these  are  the  things  above  all  others  that  have 
been  learned  from  the  last  of  the  epistles  of  Paul. 


In  The  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  252-261.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves,  articles  on 
"Timothy"  and  "Titus."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and  its 
Writers,"  pp.  104-115.  Lewin,  "The  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul," 
vol.  ii,  chs.  vii,  viii,  ix,  x  and  xi.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  "The  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,"  ch.  xxvii.  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  St.  Paul," 
pp.  133-136.  Warfield,  "Acts,  Timothy,  Titus  and  Philemon,"  in  "The 
Temple  Bible,"  pp.  xxvii-xliii.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary 
for  English  Readers,  vol.  iii,  pp.  171-264  :  Spence,  "The  Pastoral  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul."  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges":  Hum- 
phreys, "The  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus."  Zahn,  "Introduction 
to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  1-133.  The  last  named  work  is 
intended  primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but 
can  also  be  used  by  others. 


Sen.  T.  HI.  2. 


PART    III  : 

The  Presentation  and  Defense  of 
Christianity 


LESSON   XXVII 

A   PRESENTATION   OF  JESUS  TO  JEWISH   CHRISTIANS 

The  Gospel  According  to  Matthew 


The  Gospel  of  Matthew  is  probably,  as  has  been  said,  the  most 
important  book  that  was  ever  written.  Its  importance  is  due  to  the 
information  which  it  contains  about  Jesus  Christ.  More  fully  per- 
haps than  any  other  one  book,  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  has  preserved 
the  knowledge  of  Jesus. 

Whatever  be  the  future  of  the  Church,  the  life  of  Jesus  will  now 
always  remain  the  central  fact  of  history.  Even  the  secondary  in- 
fluence of  Jesus  is  incalculable;  even  if  none  were  left  to  own  him  as 
Lord  and  Master,  still  he  would  remain  incomparably  the  most  in- 
fluential man  that  has  ever  lived.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however, 
such  a  condition  has  never  existed  and  never  will  exist.  From  the 
very  beginning  the  life  of  Jesus  made  itself  felt  through  those  who 
accepted  him,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others,  as  the  supreme  Lord  of 
their  lives.  If  Jesus  had  been  regarded  merely  as  a  quiet  teacher  of 
ethics,  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  never  would  have  been  written,  and 
probably  the  very  name  of  Jesus  would  have  perished.  The  won- 
derful influence  of  Jesus,  which  has  transformed  the  world  from 
darkness  to  light,  which  alone  gives  promise  of  a  final  reign  of 
righteousness,  has  been  exerted  through  the  instrumentality,  not  of 
admirers,  but  of  disciples.  Jesus  has  been  a  Teacher  only  because  he 
has  been  a  Master. 

To  make  Jesus  Master  in  the  lives  of  men  was  the  purpose  of  the 
Gospel  of  Matthew,  and  it  is  the  purpose  of  our  study  of  the  book. 
The  Gospel  was  not  written  with  merely  scientific  interest;  it  was  not 
written  merely  to  preserve  certain  gems  from  the  lips  of  an  inspired 
teacher.  The  ultimate  purpose  of  the  book  was  to  make  men  fall  at 
Jesus'  feet  with  the  words,  "My  Lord  and  my  God."  Such  a  pur- 
pose is  not  inconsistent  with  the  most  scrupulous  truthfulness. 
Adoration  of  Jesus  can  be  induced  best  of  all,  not  by  fanciful  elabora- 
tion, but  by  sober  fact.  In  the  case  of  Jesus,  truth  was  more 
glorious  by  far  than  the  boldest  fiction. 

To  make  Jesus  Lord  and  Saviour  is  the  purpose  of  our  work 

Sen.  T.  III.  3.  I,j 


148  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

as  teachers.  That  purpose  cannot  be  attained  by  exhortation  or 
by  threatening,  but  only  by  impartation  of  knowledge.  To  know 
Jesus  is  to  trust  him  and  adore  him.  Many  readers  of  the  Gospels 
never  attain  to  the  true  knowledge.  Their  failure  is  due  to  various 
causes — to  moral  laxness,  to  preconceived  opinions,  to  spiritual 
dullness.  One  obstacle,  however,  is  of  a  simpler  kind.  One  thing 
that  stands  in  the  way  of  a  real  understanding  of  the  Gospels  is  the 
habit  of  piecemeal  reading.  We  read  the  Gospels  bit  by  bit  instead 
of  allowing  the  whole  to  make  its  impression.  We  do  not  see  the 
wood  for  the  trees.  Jesus  is  concealed  from  us  by  his  individual  acts. 
The  Gospels  should  be  read  as  well  as  studied — read  rapidly,  like  an 
ordinary  book,  preferably  in  some  rational  form  of  printing  where 
verse  numbers  and  all  editorial  matters  are  relegated  to  the  margin 
and  the  lines  stretch  across  the  page.  These  things  may  seem  to  be 
trivialities,  and  certainly  they  are  not  essential.  What  is  essential — 
not  in  place  of  detailed  study,  but  in  addition  to  it — is  a  rapid 
reading  of  the  Gospels,  by  which,  through  the  exclusion  of  all  non- 
essentials, the  mysterious,  holy  person  of  Jesus  is  brought 
simply  and  freshly  before  the  wondering  soul.  Not  to  know 
about  Jesus,  but  to  know  him,  is  the  prime  object  of  our 
study.  To  know  about  him  is  a  valuable  part  of  education;  but 
to  know  him  is  life  eternal. 

1.     MEANING  OF  "GOSPEL" 

The  Greek  word  for  "gospel"  means  "good  news."  Nowhere  in 
the  New  Testament,  however,  is  that  word  applied  to  a  book. 
There  is  no  reference  in  the  New  Testament  to  a  "Gospel"  of 
Matthew  or  of  Mark  or  of  Luke  or  of  John.  In  the  New  Testament 
the  word  "gospel"  has  a  more  general  reference.  It  designates  the 
"good  news"  which  lies  at  the  basis  of  Christian  preaching,  however 
that  news  may  be  known.  Christianity  is  based  upon  "a  piece  of 
information."  The  subject  of  that  information  is  the  life  and  death 
and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ.  Without  Christ  we  should  have 
been  hopeless,  but  Christ  has  saved  us.  Information  about  what 
he  has  done  for  us,  however  that  information  be  conveyed,  is  the 
gospel. 

This  broad  use  of  the  word  "gospel"  appears  even  in  the  titles 
"Gospel  according  to  Matthew,"  "Gospel  according  to  Mark," 
"Gospel  according  to  Luke,"  and  "Gospel  according  to  John," 
which  "are  not  due  to  the  original  authors  of  the  books.  "Gospel 
according  to  Matthew"  did  not  originally  mean  the  same  thing  as 

Sen.  T.  III.  3. 


A  PRESENTATION   OF  JESUS  149 

"Gospel  of  Matthew."  It  did  not  mean  the  Gospel  which  Matthew 
produced,  but  the  one  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  as  Matthew  narrated 
it.  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John  produced  simply  four  accounts 
of  the  same  thing.  That  common  subject  of  the  four  accounts  is 
the  gospel,  the  good  news,  of  what  Jesus  Christ  has  done  for  his 
followers. 

At  a  very  early  time,  however,  books  which  had  the  gospel  as  their 
subject  came  themselves  to  be  designated  as  "Gospels."  The  usage 
is  convenient,  and  will  be  freely  adopted  in  these  textbooks.  We 
may  speak  indiscriminately  of  the  "Gospel  according  to  Matthew" 
and  of  the  "Gospel  of  Matthew." 

2.     AUTHORSHIP  OF  THE  FIRST  GOSPEL 

(1)  Not  Indicated  in  the  Gospel  Itself. — The  Gospel  of  Matthew 
should  be  sharply  distinguished  from  those  books  which  them- 
selves make  definite  claims  as  to  their  authorship.  The  Epistle 
to  the  Romans,  for  example,  claims  to  have  been  written  by  the 
apostle  Paul.  If  it  was  not  written  by  Paul,  it  is  a  forgery.  The 
book  of  The  Acts,  also,  though  it  does  not  mention  the  name  of  the 
author,  claims  at  least — through  the  use  of  the  first  person  plural 
- — to  have  been  written  by  some  companion  of  the  apostle  Paul. 
Even  the  Gospel  of  John,  as  we  shall  see,  really  affords  clear  indi- 
cations about  its  own  authorship.  The  Gospel  of  Matthew,  on  the 
other  hand,  lays  no  claim  to  any  particular  authorship.  We  might 
believe  that  it  was  written  by  some  other  person  than  Matthew  and 
yet  be  perfectly  loyal  to  the  book  itself.  The  self-witness  of  the 
book  is  confined  merely  to  a  claim  of  truthfulness.  If  we  believe 
that  the  record  which  the  book  contains  is  true,  then  we  might,  in 
perfect  loyalty  to  the  Gospel,  believe  that  it  was  written  by  some 
one  like  Luke  or  Mark,  outside  of  the  company  of  the  apostles. 
Such  a  view,  however,  would  display  an  unreasonable  distrust  of 
Christian  tradition. 

(2)  Papias  on  the  First  Gospel. — The  earliest  extant  informa- 
tion about  the  authorship  of  the  First  Gospel  is  to  be  found  in  a 
fragment  which  Eusebius,  the  church  historian  of  the  fourth  century, 
has  preserved  from  a  lost  work  of  Papias.  Papias  was  bishop  of 
Hierapolis  in  Asia  Minor  in  the  former  half  of  the  second  century. 

The  fragment  from  Papias,  which  is  found  in  Eusebius,  Church 
History,  iii,  39,  16,  may  be  translated  as  follows: 

"Matthew  accordingly  wrote  [or  compiled]  the  oracles  in  the 
Hebrew  dialect,  and  everyone  translated  them  as  he  was  able." 


150  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

It  seems  pretty  evident  that  Papias  is  here  referring  to  the  First 
Gospel.  Some,  indeed,  have  supposed  that  he  means  by  "the 
oracles"  a  writing  composed  almost  exclusively  of  sayings  of  Jesus, 
which  formed  merely  one  of  the  sources  of  our  First  Gospel.  This 
view  is  probably  incorrect.  Papias  could  designate  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew  as  "the  oracles"  either  because  of  the  large  place  which 
sayings  of  Jesus  have  in  this  Gospel,  as  compared,  for  example,  with 
the  Gospel  of  Mark,  or  else  because  the  whole  Gospel,  both  speeches 
and  narrative,  was  of  divine,  oracular  authority.  The  view  that 
"according  to  Matthew"  in  the  ancient  title  and  in  Christian 
tradition  means  not  that  Matthew  wrote  the  book,  but  that  it  is 
based  in  some  way  ultimately  on  his  authority,  is  opposed  by  the 
analogy  of  Mark.  As  we  shall  see,  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  in  early 
tradition,  was  referred  ultimately  to  the  authority  of  Peter;  if, 
therefore,  "according  to"  was  used  in  the  sense  indicated  above, 
the  Second  Gospel  would  have  been  called  the  Gospel  "according  to 
Peter"  instead  of  the  Gospel  "according  to  Mark." 

The  testimony  of  Papias  involves  two  principal  assertions:  in  the 
first  place,  that  Matthew  wrote  the  First  Gospel;  and  in  the  second 
place,  that  he  wrote  it  in  the  "Hebrew"  language. 

The  former  assertion,  which  is  supported  by  a  striking  consensus 
of  early  writers,  has  already  been  considered.  The  latter  is  much 
more   puzzling. 

3.     WAS  THE  FIRST  GOSPEL  ORIGINALLY  ARAMAIC? 

(1)  Meaning  of  "Hebrew." — By  "the  Hebrew  dialect,"  Papias 
no  doubt  means  Aramaic  rather  than  what  we  call  Hebrew.  The 
term  "Hebrew"  was  applied  to  both  of  the  two  closely  related 
languages.  Compare  Acts  21  :  40.  It  is  exceedingly  unlikely  that 
a  Gospel  would  have  been  written  in  Hebrew;  for  before  the  time  of 
Christ  that  had  ceased  to  be  the  living  language  of  Palestine.  What 
Papias  asserts,  then,  is  that  Matthew  wrote  in  Aramaic. 

(2)  "Everyone  Translated  Them  as  He  Was  Able." — Papias 
asserts  further  that  everyone  translated  the  oracles  as  he  was  able. 
These  words  may  be  interpreted  in  various  ways.  Perhaps  they 
mean  that  every  man  who  used  the  original  of  Matthew  had  to 
translate  it  for  himself;  or  perhaps  that  the  Gospel  was  translated 
orally  in  the  churches,  as  the  Jews  translated  the  Hebrew  Old  Testa- 
ment into  Aramaic  in  the  synagogues;  or  perhaps  that  a  number  of 
written  translations  of  the  Gospel  were  made.  At  any  rate  Papias 
seems  to  imply  that  the  condition  which  he  here  describes  had  come 


A  PRESENTATION  OF  JESUS  151 

to  an  end  when  he  wrote.  Some  one  Greek  form  of  the  Gospel  had 
gained  general  acceptance ;  the  time  when  everyone  translated  as  he 
was  able  was  at  an  end. 

(3)  Value  of  the  Tradition. — The  tradition  of  an  Aramaic  orig- 
inal of  Matthew  is  not  preserved  merely  by  Papias,  but  appears 
in  a  considerable  number  of  early  writers.  How  far  the  other 
writers  are  independent  of  Papias  is  a  disputed  question.  The 
tradition  may  be  variously  estimated.  Some  have  supposed  that 
it  is  entirely  correct — that  our  Greek  Gospel  of  Matthew  is  a  trans- 
lation, by  Matthew  himself  or  by  some  one  else,  of  an  Aramaic  work : 
others  have  supposed  that  the  tradition  is  altogether  false — for 
example,  that  an  Aramaic  translation  of  the  Greek  Gospel  was  mis- 
taken for  an  original  from  which  the  Greek  Gospel  had  been  trans- 
lated: others  hold  intermediate  views — for  example,  that  one  of  the 
sources  of  our  Greek  Gospel  was  written  in  Aramaic.  An  important 
objection  to  the  view  that  there  was  an  Aramaic  original  of  Matthew 
is  that  the  Greek  Gospel  looks  more  like  an  original  Greek  work  than 
like  a  translation.  The  tradition  of  the  Aramaic  Matthew  places 
before  us  one  of  the  unsolved  problems  of  New  Testament  criticism. 
One  thing  is  certain — the  language  of  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  like 
that  of  the  other  Gospels,  has  a  strong  Aramaic  coloring.  This, 
however,  does  not  require  the  hypothesis  that  our  Matthew  was 
translated  from  an  Aramaic  original.  Undoubtedly,  however  our 
Greek  Matthew  was  written,  there  was  a  time  in  the  early  days  of 
the  Church  when  the  tradition  of  the  life  of  Christ  was  carried  on 
chiefly  or  wholly  in  the  Aramaic  language.  The  words  of  Jesus,  at 
any  rate,  as  they  appear  in  our  Gospels,  have  at  some  time  or  other 
undergone  translation;  for  Jesus  taught  in  Aramaic.  The  Aramaic 
coloring  of  the  Gospels  is  one  of  the  evidences  of  their  trustworthi- 
ness. Though  written  in  Greek,  they  are  evidently  rooted  deep  in 
the  original  Palestinian  soil. 

4.     DATE 

The  date  of  the  Gospel  cannot  be  determined  with  accuracy. 
Some  indication,  however,  is  afforded  by  the  assertion  of  Irenseus, 
of  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century,  that  Matthew  published  his 
Gospel  while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  at  Rome.  Even  if  this 
assertion  should  prove  not  to  be  absolutely  correct,  it  would  exhibit 
an  early  tradition  for  the  years  between  about  A.  D.  60  and  70  as 
the  date  of  the  Gospel.  This  tradition  is  confirmed  by  the  wide- 
spread view  among  early  writers  that  Matthew  was  written  before 
Mark;  for  Mark  is  now  generally  admitted  to  have  been  written 


152  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  A.  D.  70.  There  is  really 
no  serious  objection  to  the  traditional  dating  of  Matthew.  It  was 
probably  written  in  the  sixties  of  the  first  century,  and  probably,  as 
tradition  says,  in  Palestine. 

There  are  traces  of  the  use  of  the  Gospel  in  writers  of  the  early 
half  of  the  second  century.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  clear  indi- 
cation that  it  was  used  by  any  New  Testament  writer.  The  absence 
of  citations  from  our  Gospels  in  the  epistles  of  Paul  would  tend  to 
indicate  that  in  the  very  earliest  period  the  gospel  tradition  was 
carried  on  by  word  of  mouth  rather  than  by  books. 

5.     THE  APOSTLE  MATTHEW 

In  the  four  lists  of  the  apostles,  Matt.  10  :  2-4;  Mark  3  :  16-19; 
Luke  6  :  13-16;  Acts  1  :  13,  Matthew  is  designated  by  the  bare 
name,  except  in  his  own  Gospel,  where  he  appears  as  "Matthew 
the  publican."  In  Matt.  9  :  9,  his  call  is  narrated.  In  the 
parallel  passages  in  Mark  and  Luke,  Mark  2  :  14;  Luke  5  :  27,  28, 
the  name  of  the  publican  who  was  called  is  given  only  as  "Levi." 
Without  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  we  should  not  have  been  able  to 
identify  Levi  and  Matthew.  Evidently  the  apostle  had  two  names, 
as  was  the  case  with  so  many  others  of  the  persons  mentioned  in  the 
New  Testament.  After  his  call,  Matthew  made  a  great  feast  for 
Jesus.  Luke  5  :  29;  compare  Mark  2  :  15.  Matthew  himself, 
alone  among  the  Synoptists,  does  not  even  make  it  perfectly  clear 
that  it  was  he  in  whose  house  Jesus  sat  at  meat.  The  peculiarities 
of  the  First  Gospel  in  what  is  said  about  Matthew  become  significant 
when  the  authorship  is  known.  Of  course  of  themselves  they  would 
be  quite  insufficient  to  indicate  who  the  author  was.  The  assertion 
by  early  writers  that  Matthew  wrote  the  Gospel,  was  based  not  upon 
indications  in  the  Gospel  itself,  but  upon  independent  tradition. 

6.     "THE  BOOK  OF  THE  GENERATION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST" 

The  first  verse  of  the  Gospel  is  evidently  based  upon  the  formula, 
occurring  for  the  first  time  at  Gen.  5:1,  which  marks  off  the 
divisions  of  the  book  of  Genesis.  It  is  most  naturally  regarded  as  a 
heading  for  the  genealogy  that  follows  in  Matt.  1  :  2-17.  There  is 
only  one  objection  to  that  view.  In  Genesis  "the  book  of  the  gener- 
ations of  Adam,"  or  "the  generations  of  Shem"  or  the  like,  introduces 
an  account,  not  of  ancestors  of  the  persons  in  question,  but  of  their 
descendants.  InMatt.  1  :  2-17,  on  the  contrary,  we  have  an  account 
not  of  descendants  of  Jesus,  but  of  ancestors.    This  objection  has  led 


A  PRESENTATION  OF  JESUS  153 

some  scholars  to  regard  Matt.  1  :  1  as  the  title  not  of  the  genealogy 
but  of  the  whole  Gospel.  The  title  would  then  represent  Jesus  as 
the  beginning  of  a  new  race,  or  of  a  new  period  in  the  history  of 
humanity. 

This  interpretation  is  unnecessarily  subtle.  It  should  rather  be 
admitted  that  there  is  a  difference  between  the  phrase  in  Genesis  and 
that  in  Matthew.  The  difference  is  very  natural.  In  the  case  of 
Abraham  the  descendants  were  in  view;  in  the  case  of  the  Messiah, 
the  ancestors.  Adam  and  Noah  and  Abraham  were  bearers  of  a 
promise;  Christ  was  the  culmination.  Genesis  looks  forward; 
Matthew  looks  back.  The  difference  in  the  use  of  the  phrase  is 
natural  and  significant. 

The  title,  with  the  whole  genealogy,  is  significant  of  what  is  to 
follow.  At  the  very  start,  the  ruling  thought  of  Matthew's  Gospel 
finds  expression.  Jesus  is  son  of  David,  and  son  of  Abraham;  he  is 
the  culmination  of  the  divine  promise. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
270-272,  290-293.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  (supple- 
mented), articles  on  "Gospel"  and  "Matthew."  M'Clymont,  "The  New 
Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  1-20.  Stevens  and  Burton,  "A  Harmony 
of  the  Gospels."  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English 
Readers,"  vol.  i:  Plumptre,  "The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Matthew, 
St.  Mark,  and  St.  Luke,"  pp.  xli-xliii,  1-186.  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the 
New  Testament,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  367-427,  506-601.  The  last-named  work 
is  intended  primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but 
can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XXVIII 

A  GRAPHIC  SKETCH  OF  THE  LIFE  OF  JESUS 

The  Gospel  According  to  Mark 


The  Gospel  of  Mark  contains  scarcely  any  material  which  is  not 
also  contained  in  one  or  both  of  the  other  two  Synoptic  Gospels. 
The  loss  of  Mark  would  not  diminish  appreciably  the  number  of 
facts  that  we  know  about  Jesus.  Nevertheless,  the  Second  Gospel 
is  of  the  utmost  importance;  for  although  it  narrates  for  the  most 
part  only  the  same  facts  as  are  also  narrated  elsewhere,  it  narrates 
them  in  a  different  way.  Indeed  the  very  brevity  of  the  Gospel  adds 
to  its  special  value.  A  picture  is  sometimes  the  more  impressive  by 
being  limited  in  extent.  Read  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  not  piecemeal 
but  as  a  whole,  and  you  obtain  an  impression  of  Jesus  which  can  be 
obtained  from  no  other  book. 

1.     THE  TRADITION 

(1)  Papias  on  Mark. — As  in  the  case  of  Matthew,  so  in  that  of 
Mark  it  is  Papias  of  Hierapolis  who  provides  the  earliest  information 
about  the  production  of  the  Gospel.  Again  also  the  words  of  Papias 
are  quoted  by  Eusebius  (Church  History,  iii,  39,  15).  The  passage 
from  Papias  is  as  follows: 

"This  also  the  presbyter  said:  'Mark,  on  the  one  hand,  being  an 
interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  accurately  as  many  things  as  he  remem- 
bered, yet  not  in  order,  the  things  which  were  either  said  or  done  by 
the  Lord.'  For  neither  did  he  hear  the  Lord  nor  did  he  follow  him, 
but  afterwards,  as  I  said,  he  followed  Peter,  who  carried  on  his 
teaching  as  need  required  but  not  as  though  he  were  making  an 
ordered  account  of  the  oracles  of  the  Lord;  so  that  Mark  committed 
no  fault  when  he  wrote  some  things  as  he  had  remembered  them. 
For  he  had  one  care — that  he  should  not  leave  out  anything  of  the 
things  that  he  had  heard,  or  represent  anything  among  them  falsely." 

(2)  Antiquity  of  the  Papian  Tradition. — It  will  be  observed 
that  Papias  is  here  represented  as  quoting  from  "the  presbyter." 
Probably,  however,  it  is  only  the  first  sentence  that  is  quoted ;  the 
rest  seems  to  be  an  explanation  by  Papias  himself.    By  "  presbyter," 

154 


A  GRAPHIC  SKETCH  OF  THE  LIFE  OF  JESUS       155 

or  "elder,"  Papias  means  not  an  officer  in  the  Church,  but  a  man  of 
an  older  generation.  The  tradition  is  therefore  very  ancient. 
Papias  himself  lived  in  the  former  half  of  the  second  century;  a  man 
of  a  still  older  generation  would  probably  have  acquired  his  infor- 
mation about  Mark  well  before  A.  D.  100.  Such  information  is  not 
to  be  lightly  rejected. 

(3)  Mark  an  Interpreter  of  Peter. — According  to  the  presby- 
ter, Mark  was  an  "interpreter"  of  Peter.  If  the  word  be  taken 
strictly  it  means  that  Mark  translated  the  words  of  Peter  from  one 
language  into  another — probably  from  Aramaic  into  Greek.  On 
the  whole,  however,  it  is  not  probable,  in  view  of  linguistic  conditions 
in  Palestine  and  in  the  Church,  that  Peter  would  be  unable  to  speak 
( .reek.  Perhaps,  then,  the  sentence  means  that  Markwasmerely  the 
mediator,  in  a  general  sense,  of  Peter's  preaching.  He  presented  the 
teaching  of  Peter  to  those  who  had  not  had  the  opportunity  of 
hearing  it  themselves.  Perhaps  the  meaning  is  that  he  had  done 
so  formerly  by  word  of  mouth.  Perhaps,  however,  it  is  rather  the 
Gospel  itself  that  is  referred  to.  By  writing  the  Gospel  Mark  be- 
came an  interpreter  or  mediator  of  the  preaching  of  Peter. 

At  any  rate,  whatever  meaning  be  given  to  the  word  "interpreter," 
the  general  sense  of  the  sentence — especially  when  taken  in  connec- 
tion with  the  following  explanation  by  Papias  is  fairly  clear.  Mark 
derived  the  information  for  his  Gospel  not  from  personal  acquaint- 
ance with  the  earthly  Jesus,  but  from  association  with  Peter. 

(4)  Mark  Not  Written  "In  Order." — The  presbyter  said  further 
that  although  Mark  wrote  accurately  what  he  heard  from 
Peter,  he  did  not  succeed  in  giving  "in  order"  an  account  of  the 
things  that  Jesus  did  and  said.  Evidently  the  historical  incom- 
pleteness, the  lack  of  uninterrupted  sequence,  of  the  Gospel  of  Mark 
is  here  in  view. 

But  by  what  standard  is  the  Gospel  judged?  It  can  hardly  be 
by  the  standard  of  Matthew,  for  Matthew  pays  even  less  attention  to 
temporal  sequence  than  Mark  does.  The  order  in  Luke  also  is  by  no 
means  in  all  respects  more  strictly  chronological  than  that  in  Mark. 
Only  one  standard  satisfies  the  requirements  of  the  presbyter's 
words — the  standard  provided  by  the  teaching  of  John.  John  was 
the  great  leader  of  the  Church  of  Asia  Minor.  His  teaching 
naturally  formed  the  standard  of  authority  in  that  region.  Perhaps 
at  the  time  when  the  presbyter  expressed  his  judgment  on  Mark  the 
Gospel  of  John  had  already  been  written,  so  that  one  Gospel  could 
be  compared  with  the  other;  perhaps,  however,  it  was  merely  the 


156  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

oral  teaching  of  John,  afterwards  embodied  in  the  Gospel,  which 
afforded  the  basis  of  comparison.  The  Gospel  of  John  alone  pro- 
vides something  like  a  chronological  framework  of  the  public  ministry 
of  Jesus:  John  alone  mentions  the  early  Judean  ministry;  John  alone 
narrates  the  successive  visits  of  Jesus  to  the  feasts  in  Jerusalem.  If, 
as  is  possible,  "the  presbyter"  of  Papias  was  none  other  than  John 
himself,  then  of  course  the  whole  matter  becomes  especially  plain. 
John  knew  that  there  were  important  omissions  in  the  Gospel  of 
Mark;  he  probably  observed,  for  example,  that  that  Gospel  if  taken 
alone  might  readily  create  the  impression  that  the  ministry  of  Jesus 
lasted  only  one  year  instead  of  three  or  four.  No  doubt  he 
corrected  this  impression  in  his  oral  teaching;  certainly  he  corrects 
it  in  his  Gospel.  In  commending  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  John 
would  naturally  call  attention  to  its  chronological  incompleteness. 

2.     THE  HEADING 

Like  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  the  Gospel  of  Mark  opens  not  with  a 
sentence,  but  with  a  heading.  As  in  the  former  case,  however,  the 
exact  reference  of  the  heading  is  uncertain.  "The  beginning  of  the 
gospel  of  Jesus  Christ"  may,  in  the  first  place,  mean  merely,  "Here 
begins  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ."  "The  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ" 
would  then  be  simply  the  story  about  Christ  that  is  narrated  in  the 
book  that  follows. 

In  the  second  place,  the  phrase  may  be  taken  as  a  description  of 
the  contents  of  the  book.  The  whole  of  Jesus'  life  would  then  be 
described  as  the  beginning  of  that  proclamation  of  the  gospel  which 
was  afterwards  continued  by  the  apostles  and  by  the  Church. 

In  the  third  place,  the  phrase  may  be  merely  a  heading  for  the 
section  that  immediately  follows,  for  Mark  1  :  2-8,  or  for  vs.  2-13. 
In  this  case  the  preaching  of  John  the  Baptist,  with  or  without  the 
baptism  of  Jesus,  the  descent  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  temptation, 
would  be  described  as  the  beginning  of,  as  preliminary  to,  the  proc- 
lamation of  the  gospel,  which  is  mentioned  in  vs.  14,  15. 

Perhaps  the  first  interpretation  is  to  be  preferred  as  being  the 
simplest,  though  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  phrase  is  a  little 
puzzling. 

3.     MARK  THE  MISSIONARY  GOSPEL 

It  is  significant  that  the  Gospel  of  Mark  begins  not  with  the 
birth  and  infancy  of  Jesus,  but  with  the  ministry  of  John  the 
Baptist  and  the  subsequent  preaching  of  Jesus  in  Galilee.     Mark 


A  GRAPHIC  SKETCH  OF  THE  LIFE  OF  JESUS      157 

seems  to  be  following  with  gr.eat  exactness  the  scheme  of  early- 
apostolic  preaching  as  it  is  laid  down  in  Acts  10  :  37-43.  Ap- 
parently Mark  is  preeminently  the  missionary  Gospel ;  it  contains 
only  those  things  which  had  a  place  in  the  first  preaching  to  un- 
believers. That  does  not  mean  that  the  things  which  Mark  omits 
are  necessarily  less  important  than  the  things  which  it  contains. 
Mark  gives  a  summary,  not  exactly  of  the  most  important  things 
about  Jesus,  but  rather  of  the  things  which  unbelievers  or  recent 
converts  could  most  easily  understand.  Hence  the  omission  of 
the  mystery  of  the  birth,  of  the  profound  teaching  of  the  early 
Judean  ministry,  of  the  intimate  instructions  to  the  disciples. 
These  things  are  of  fundamental  importance.  But  they  can  best 
be  understood  only  after  one  has  first  acquired  a  thorough  grasp 
of  the  public  ministry,  and  of  the  death  and  resurrection. 

The  Second  Gospel,  judged  by  purely  formal  standards,  cannot 
be  called  exactly  a  beautiful  book.  It  lacks  the  rhythm  of  Old 
Testament  poetry,  and  the  grace  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke.  But 
its  rough,  vigorous  naturalness  conveys  a  message  of  compelling 
power. 


In  the  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves 
(edited)  article  on  "Mark."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and 
Its  Writers,"  pp.  21-26.  Stevens  and  Burton,  "A  Harmony  of  the 
Gospels."  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English 
Readers,"  vol.  i:  Plumptre,  "The  Gospel  according  to  St.  Matthew, 
St.  Mark,  and  St.  Luke,"  pp.  187-234.  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for 
Schools":  Maclear,  "The  Gospel  according  to  St.  Mark."  Zahn, 
"Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  427-506,  601-617. 
The  last-named  work  is  intended  primarily  for  those  who  have  some 
knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON   XXIX 

A  GREEK  HISTORIAN'S  ACCOUNT  OF  JESUS 
The  Gospel  According  to  Luke 


The  purpose  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke  was,  the  author  says  in  his 
prologue,  that  Theophilus  might  know  the  certainty  concerning  the 
things  wherein  he  had  been  instructed.  These  words  involve 
recognition  of  a  fundamental  need  of  the  Church,  which  is  to-day 
often  ignored.  After  interest  in  Christianity  has  been  aroused, 
after  faith  has  been  awakened,  the  Christian  feels  the  need  of  a 
deeper  intellectual  grounding  of  the  faith  that  is  in  him.  This  feeling 
is  perfectly  legitimate;  it  should  not  be  stifled;  the  expression  of  it 
should  not  be  treated  necessarily  as  sinful  doubt. 

The  treatment  of  these  natural  questionings  is  one  of  the  most 
important  problems  that  faces  the  teachers  of  the  present  course. 
We  are  dealing  with  young  men  and  women  of  maturing  minds, 
many  of  whom  can  no  longer  be  satisfied  with  the  unthinking  faith 
of  childhood.  If  Christianity  is  to  remain  permanently  a  force  in 
their  lives  it  must  be  related  to  their  entire  intellectual  equipment; 
it  must  be  exhibited  as  a  reasonable  thing,  which  is  consistent  with 
a  sane  and  healthy  view  of  the  world.  In  other  words,  we  are  deal- 
ing with  the  problem  of  religious  doubt,  which  is  almost  an  in- 
evitable stage  in  the  development  of  intelligent  Christians  of  the 
present  day. 

Undoubtedly  the  problem  is  often  very  unwisely  handled.  By 
hearing  every  natural  expression  of  their  doubt  unmercifully  decried 
as  rebellion  against  the  Word  of  God,  many  intelligent  young 
people  are  being  driven  into  hopeless  estrangement  from  the  Church. 
It  is  useless  to  try  to  bully  people  into  faith.  Instead,  we  ought  to 
learn  the  method  of  the  Third  Gospel. 

Very  possibly  Luke  was  facing  the  very  same  problem  that  is  be- 
fore us  teachers  to-day — very  possibly  Theophilus,  to  whom  the 
Gospel  and  The  Acts  were  dedicated,  was  a  young  man  who  had 
grown  up  in  the  Church  and  could  now  no  longer  be  satisfied  with 
the  vague  and  unsystematic  instruction  that  had  been  given  him 
in  childhood.     At  any  rate,  whether  he  was  a  young  man  grown  up 

158 


A  GREEK  HISTORIAN'S  ACCOUNT  OF  JESUS       159 

in  the  Church,  or  a  recent  convert,  or  merely  a  Gentile  interested  in 
Christianity,  he  was  a  person  of  intellectual  interests,  and  those 
interests  are  treated  by  the  evangelist  not  with  contempt  but  with 
the  utmost  sympathy.  The  Gospel  was  written  in  order  that 
Theophilus  might  "know  the  certainty"  of  those  things  wherein  he 
had  been  instructed. 

That  might  be  regarded  as  the  motto  for  the  entire  course  of 
study  which  we  have  undertaken  this  year.  It  should  be  our  aim 
to  lay  before  young  people  of  the  Church  the  certainty  of  the  things 
wherein  they  have  been  instructed — to  enable  them  to  substitute 
for  the  unreasoning  faith  of  childhood  the  profound  convictions  of 
full-grown  men  and  women.  Moreover,  exactly  like  the  author  of 
the  Third  Gospel,  we  are  endeavoring  to  accomplish  this  aim,  not 
by  argument,  but  by  an  orderly  presentation  of  "those  matters  which 
have  been  fulfilled  among  us."  A  simple  historical  presentation  of 
the  facts  upon  which  Christianity  is  founded  is  the  surest  safeguard 
of  Christian  faith. 

1.     THE   PROLOGUE 

Alone  among  the  Synoptists  Luke  gives  his  readers  some  direct 
information  about  the  methods  of  his  work.  Luke  1  :  1-4;  Acts 
1  :  1,  2.  This  information,  which  was  barely  touched  upon  in  the 
Student's  Text  Book,  must  here  be  considered  somewhat  more  in 
detail. 

(1)  Luke  Not  an  Eyewitness  from  the  Beginning. — From  the 
prologue  to  the  Gospel,  Luke  1  :  1-4,  it  appears,  in  the  first  place, 
that  Luke  was  not  an  eyewitness  of  the  events  that  he  narrates — 
at  least  he  was  not  an  eyewitness  "from  the  beginning." 

(2)  His  Predecessors. — In  the  second  place,  it  appears  that  he  had 
had  predecessors  in  his  task  of  writing  an  account  of  early  Christian 
history.  Apparently,  however,  none  of  these  previous  works  were 
produced  by  an  apostle  or  by  an  eyewitness  of  the  earthly  ministry 
of  Jesus.  The  previous  writers,  like  Luke  himself,  were  dependent 
upon  the  testimony  of  the  eyewitnesses.  The  Gospel  of  Matthew, 
therefore,  since  it  was  written  by  an  apostle,  was  not  one  of  the 
works  to  which  reference  is  made.  This  conclusion  is  amply  con- 
firmed by  a  comparison  of  Matthew  with  Luke.  Evidently,  at  least, 
the  two  are  entirely  independent.  If  Luke  refers  to  the  First 
Gospel  in  the  prologue,  at  any  rate  he  made  no  use  of  it. 

(3)  Was  Mark  One  of  the  Predecessors? — The  Gospel  of  Mark,  on 
the  contrary,  answers  to  the  description  of  the  previous  works.  It 
was  written  not  by  an  eyewitness,  but  by  one  who  listened  to  eye- 


160  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

witnesses.  Perhaps,  therefore,  it  was  one  of  the  many  works  to 
which  Luke  refers.  If  so,  it  may  well  have  been  used  by  Luke  in 
the  preparation  of  his  own  Gospel.  This  supposition  is  by  no  means 
excluded  by  a  comparison  of  the  two  books.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  great  majority  of  modern  scholars  suppose  that  the  writer  of 
the  Third  Gospel  made  use  of  the  Gospel  of  Mark.  All  that  can 
here  be  asserted  is  that  this  view,  though  not  required  by  what  Luke 
says  in  his  prologue,  is  perfectly  consistent  with  it. 

(4)  Luke's  Attitude  Toward  the  Predecessors. — It  should  be  ob- 
served that  Luke  attaches  no  blame  whatever  to  the  efforts  of  his  fore- 
runners. When  he  says  that  they  had  "taken  in  hand"  or  "attempted" 
to  write  accounts  of  certain  things,  he  does  not  imply  in  the  slightest 
that  their  attempts  had  been  unsuccessful.  He  means  simply  to 
justify  his  own  procedure  by  a  reference  to  what  had  already  been 
done.  "My  effort  at  writing  an  account  of  the  origin  of  Chris- 
tianity," he  says  in  effect,  "is  no  strange,  unheard-of  thing.  I  have 
had  many  predecessors."  Such  a  reference  to  the  work  of  pred- 
ecessors was  in  antiquity  a  common  literary  form.  At  the  very 
beginning  of  his  work,  Luke  displays  the  effects  of  his  Greek  literary 
training. 

Of  course,  however,  although  Luke  attaches  no  blame  to  his 
predecessors,  he  would  not  have  undertaken  a  new  work  if  he  had 
thought  that  the  old  satisfied  all  needs.  Evidently  he  hoped  to 
accomplish  by  his  own  book  something  that  his  predecessors  had 
not  accomplished  or  had  accomplished  only  in  part. 

(5)  The  Subject  of  the  Gospel. — Finally,  therefore,  Luke  informs  his 
readers  what  his  own  peculiar  methods  and  purposes  were.  The 
main  subject  of  the  Gospel  is  not  described  with  any  definiteness  in 
Luke  1  :  1-4,  but  it  appears  in  the  retrospect  at  the  beginning  of  the 
second  work.  There  the  subject  of  the  Gospel  is  designated  as  "all 
that  Jesus  began  both  to  do  and  to  teach,  until  the  day  in  which  he 
was  received  up,  after  that  he  had  given  commandment  through  the 
Holy  Spirit  unto  the  apostles  whom  he  had  chosen."  Acts 
1  :  1,  2.  The  subject  of  the  Gospel,  in  other  words,  was  the  earthly 
life  of  Jesus. 

(6)  Completeness  of  the  Narrative. — In  treating  this  subject,  Luke 
had  striven,  he  says,  Luke  1  :  3,  first  of  all  for  completeness.  In  his 
investigations  he  had  followed  all  things  from  the  beginning.  This 
feature  appears  plainly  in  the  Gospel.  Instead  of  beginning  as 
Mark  does,  with  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus,  Luke  first  gives  an 
account  of  the  birth  and  infancy,  and  not  content  with  that,  he 


A  GREEK  HISTORIAN'S  ACCOUNT  OF  JESUS       l6l 

goes  back  even  to  events  preceding  the  birth  not  only  of  Jesus,  but 
also  of  his  forerunner. 

(7)  Accuracy. — In  the  second  place,  Luke  says  that  he  had  striven 
after  accuracy.  Here  again  the  Gospel  justifies  the  claim  of  its 
author.  The  effort  after  precision  may  be  seen  perhaps  especially 
in  such  a  passage  as  Luke  3:1,2,  where  there  is  an  elaborate  dating 
of  the  beginning  of  John  the  Baptist's  ministry. 

(8)  Orderly  Arrangement. — The  effort  at  orderly  arrangement, 
which  forms  a  third  part  of  the  claim  which  the  author  makes,  was, 
especially  in  the  Gospel,  limited  by  the  material  that  was  at  hand. 
Evidently  in  Palestine  in  the  early  period,  the  memory  of  the  earthly 
ministry  of  Jesus  was  preserved  not  in  a  connected  narrative,  but  in 
isolated  anecdotes.  It  was  impossible,  therefore,  even  for  a  his- 
torian like  Luke  to  maintain  a  chronological  arrangement  through- 
out; where  chronological  arrangement  was  impossible  he  was 
obliged  to  be  satisfied  with  an  arrangement  according  to  logical 
affinities.  This  logical  method  of  arrangement,  however,  is  not 
resorted  to  by  Luke  so  much  as  by  Matthew;  and  for  considerable 
sections  of  his  narrative  he  was  able  to  gratify  his  historian's  desire 
for  recounting  events  in  the  order  in  which  they  happened. 

(9)  Luke  a  Historian. — Detailed  examination  of  the  prologue  should 
not  be  allowed  to  obscure  the  outstanding  fact  that  the  sum  of  what 
Luke  here  attests  is  a  genuine  historical  aim  and  method  in  the  com- 
position of  his  work.  Of  course,  history  in  Luke's  mind  did  not 
exist  for  its  own  sake.  The  Gospel  of  Luke  is  not  a  mere  scientific 
dissertation.,  On  the  contrary,  the  history  which  is  narrated  was 
to  the  author  a  thing  of  supreme  value.  But  it  was  valuable  only 
because  it  was  true.  There  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that  Luke 
was  a  bad  historian  because  he  was  a  good  Christian.  On  the 
contrary,  he  was  a  Christian  just  because  he  was  a  historian.  In  the 
case  of  Jesus,  knowledge  of  the  real  facts  is  the  surest  way  to 
adoration. 

(10)  Is  Luke  1  :  1-4  a  Prologue  to  both  the  Gospel  and  The  Acts? — 
The  first  four  verses  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke  may  be  taken  as  a 
prologue  either  to  the  Gospel  alone  or  else  to  the  entire  work,  in- 
cluding both  the  Gospel  and  The  Acts.  The  latter  view,  since  the 
subject  is  described  in  v.  1  only  in  very  broad  terms,  is  not  to  be 
rashly  rejected.  No  doubt,  however,  in  the  prologue  Luke  was 
thinking  especially  of  the  former  part  of  the  work — the  part  for 
which  he  was  dependent  altogether  upon  the  testimony  of  others. 
The  first  verses  of  The  Acts  link  the  two  parts  close  together. 

Sen.  T.  III.  3. 


1 62  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

Their  connection  has  been  obscured  by  the  traditional  arrange- 
ment of  our  New  Testament  books.  But  that  arrangement  is  al- 
together advisable.  The  former  part  of  the  Lucan  work  certainly 
belongs  among  the  Gospels;  and  of  the  Gospels  the  Gospel  of  John 
must  certainly  be  placed  last,  as  being  supplementary  to  the  others. 

2.     TYPICAL   PASSAGES 

The  characteristics  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke  may  perhaps  be  pre- 
sented more  vividly  than  by  the  general  description  in  the  Student's 
Text  Book,  by  an  examination  of  a  few  typical  passages.  The  two 
such  passages  which  we  shall  choose  somewhat  at  random,  are  the 
narrative  of  the  birth  and  infancy  in  Luke  1  :  5  to  2  :  52,  and  the 
parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son.  Ch.  15  :  11-32.  Both  of  these  are 
without  any  parallel  in  the  other  Gospels.  Matthew  provides  an 
infancy  narrative,  but  it  is  concerned  for  the  most  part  with  events 
different  from  those  that  appear  in  Luke. 

(1)  The  Narrative  of  the  Birth  and  Infancy. — It  has  often  been  ob- 
served that  the  characteristic  Greek  sentence  of  the  prologue,  Luke 
1  :  1-4,  is  immediately  followed  by  the  most  strongly  Hebraistic 
passage  in  the  New  Testament.  The  Semitic  style  of  Luke  1  :  5 
to  2  :  52  becomes  explicable  only  if  Luke  was  here  making  use  of 
Palestinian  sources,  either  oral  or  written.  This  conclusion  is  con- 
firmed by  the  whole  spirit  and  substance  of  the  narrative.  In  this 
narrative  as  clearly  as  anywhere  else  in  the  New  Testament  we 
find  ourselves  transplanted  to  Palestinian  soil. 

The  early  date  of  the  narrative  is  as  evident  as  its  Jewish  Christian 
and  Palestinian  character.  There  is  here  no  reference  to  concrete 
events  in  the  later  history  of  the  Church.  Messianic  prophecy 
appears  in  its  Old  Testament  form  uncolored  by  the  details  of  the 
fulfillment.  Evidently  this  narrative  is  no  product  of  the  Church's 
fancy,  but  genuine  history  told  in  the  very  forms  of  speech  which 
were  natural  to  those  who  participated  in  it. 

The  first  two  chapters  of  Luke  are  in  spirit  really  a  bit  of  the  Old 
Testament  continued  to  the  very  threshold  of  the  New.  These 
chapters  contain  the  poetry  of  the  New  Testament,  which  has  taken 
deep  hold  of  the  heart  and  fancy  of  the  Church. 

In  this  section  of  his  Gospel,  Luke  shows  himself  to  be  a  genuine 
historian.  A  biographer  is  not  satisfied  with  narrating  the  public 
life  of  his  hero,  but  prefaces  to  his  work  some  account  of  the  family, 
and  of  the  birth  and  childhood.  So  our  understanding  of  the 
ministry  of  Jesus  becomes  far  deeper  when  we  know  that  he  grew 


A  GREEK  HISTORIAN'S  ACCOUNT  OF  JESUS       163 

up  among  the  simple,  devout  folk  who  are  described  in  the  first  two 
chapters  of  Luke.  The  picture  of  Mary  in  these  chapters,  painted 
with  an  exquisite  delicacy  of  touch,  throws  a  flood  of  light  upon  the 
earthly  life  of  the  Son  of  Man. 

Beauty  of  detail,  however,  must  not  be  allowed  to  obscure  the 
central  fact.  The  culmination  of  the  narrative,  undoubtedly,  is  to 
be  found  in  the  stupendous  mystery  of  Luke  1  :  34,  35.  Far  from 
being  an  excrescence  in  the  narrative,  as  it  has  sometimes  been  rep- 
resented in  an  age  of  rampant  naturalism,  the  supernatural  concep- 
tion of  Jesus  is  the  very  keystone  of  the  arch.  In  this  central  fact, 
Matthew  and  Luke,  totally  independent  as  they  are,  are  perfectly 
agreed.  By  this  fact  Jesus  is  represented,  more  clearly  perhaps 
than  by  anything  else,  as  not  a  product  of  the  world  but  a  Saviour 
come  from  without. 

(2)  The  Prodigal  Son. — The  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  simple 
though  it  is,  has  often  been  sadly  misinterpreted.  It  has  been 
thought  to  mean,  for  example,  that  God  pardons  sin  on  the  basis 
simply  of  human  repentance  without  the  necessity  of  the  divine 
sacrifice.  All  such  interpretations  are  wide  of  the  mark.  The 
parable  is  not  meant  to  teach  how  God  pardons  sin,  but  only  the 
fact  that  he  does  pardon  it  with  joy,  and  that  we  ought  to  share  in 
his  joy. 

Misinterpretation  of  the  parable  has  come  from  the  ignoring  of 
its  occasion.  The  key  to  the  interpretation  is  given  in  Luke  15  :  1, 
2.*  Jesus  was  receiving  publicans  and  sinners.  Instead  of  rejoicing 
at  the  salvation  of  these  poor,  degraded  sons  of  Abraham,  the 
Pharisees  murmured.  In  rebuke,  Jesus  spoke  three  parables. 
One  of  them,  the  parable  of  the  Lost  Sheep,  is  reported  also  by 
Matthew,  ch.  18  :  12-14;  but  the  last  two,  the  parables  of  the  Lost 
Coin  and  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  appear  only  in  Luke. 

The  teaching  of  all  three  of  these  parables  is  exactly  the  same. 
The  imagery  varies,  but  the  application  is  constant.  That  ap- 
plication may  be  expressed  very  simply:  "God  rejoices  at  the  salva- 
tion of  a  sinner;  if,  therefore,  you  are  really  sons  of  God,  you  will 
rejoice  too."  In  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  however,  the 
application  is  forced  home  more  poignantly  than  in  either  of  the 
other  two.  In  that  parable  alone  among  the  three,  the  Pharisees 
could  see — in  the  elder  brother — a  direct  representation  of  them- 
selves. 

The  incident  of  the  elder  brother,  sometimes  regarded  as  a  mere 
detail,  really  introduces  the  main  point  of  the  parable.     Everything 


1 64  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

else  leads  up  to  that.  The  wonderful  description  of  the  joy  of  the 
father  at  the  prodigal's  home-coming  is  all  intended  as  a  contrast  to 
the  churlish  jealousy  of  the  brother.  The  elder  brother  was  as  far 
as  possible  from  sharing  in  the  father's  joy.  That  showed  that  he 
was  no  true  son.  Though  he  lived  under  the  father's  roof,  he  had  no 
real  inward  share  in  the  father's  life.  So  it  was  with  the  Pharisees. 
They  lived  in  the  Father's  house;  they  were,  as  we  should  say, 
members  of  the  Church.  But  when  salvation,  in  the  person  of 
Jesus,  had  at  last  come  to  the  poor,  sinful  outcasts  of  the  people, 
the  Pharisees  drew  aside.  God  rejoiced  when  the  publicans  crowded 
in  to  Jesus;  but  the  Pharisees  held  back.  That  showed  that  after 
all  they  were  not,  as  they  thought,  true  sons  of  God.  If  they  had 
been,  they  would  have  shared  God's  feeling. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  the  parable  ends  with  an  invitation. 
The  elder  brother  is  not  harshly  rebuked  by  the  father,  but  tenderly 
urged  to  come  in  still.  Will  the  invitation  be  accepted?  The 
question  is  not  answered;  and  there  lies  the  crowning  beauty  of  the 
parable.  The  Pharisees  are  still  given  a  chance.  Will  they  still 
share  the  joy  of  God  at  the  return  of  his  lost  children?  They  must 
answer  the  question  for  themselves. 

And  we,  too,  have  the  same  question  to  answer.  If  we  are  really 
children  of  God,  then  we  shall  not  despise  the  outcasts  and  the 
sinners,  but  shall  rejoice  with  him  at  their  salvation.  The  parable 
is  characteristic  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke.  Of  course,  Luke  did  not 
compose  it.  Nothing  in  the  Gospels  bears  more  indisputably  the 
marks  of  Jesus'  teaching.  But  from  the  rich  store  of  Palestinian 
tradition  Luke  sought  out  those  things  which  displayed  sympathy 
for  the  downtrodden  and  the  sick  and  the  sinful.  It  was  an 
inestimable  service  to  the  Church.  Shall  we  heed  the  message? 
God  rejoices  at  the  salvation  of  a  sinner.  Shall  we  be  sharers  in 
his  holy  joy? 


In  The  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves 
(edited),  article  on  "Luke."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and 
Its  Writers,"  pp.  27-32.  Stevens  and  Burton,  "A  Harmony  of  the 
Gospels."  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary  for  English 
Readers,"  vol.  i:  Plumptre,  "The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Matthew, 
St.  Mark,  and  St.  Luke,"  pp.  235-365.  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the 
New  Testament,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  1-173.  The  last-named  work  is  intended 
primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also 
be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XXX 

THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  BELOVED  DISCIPLE 
The  Gospel  According  to  John 


1.     THE  EVANGELIST  A  WITNESS 

The  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  a  great  man.  He  was  great, 
however,  not  as  a  philosopher  or  as  a  religious  genius,  but  as  an 
apostle ;  not  as  the  originator  of  great  ideas,  but  as  one  who  received 
the  teaching  of  another.  He  was  great,  not  as  one  who  created  a 
profound  theology,  but  as  one  who  could  understand  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  The  "Johannine  theology"  is  the  theology  not  of 
John  but  of  Jesus.  So  at  least  John  himself  represents  it.  He 
claims  to  be  not  a  theologian,  but  a  witness.  The  value  of  his  book 
depends  upon  the  truth  of  his  witnessing.  If  the  Johannine  picture 
of  Christ  is  the  creation  of  the  author's  genius,  it  commands  admira- 
tion; but  only  if  it  is  a  true  picture  of  the  historic  Jesus  can  it  offer 
eternal  life. 

Is  the  Jesus  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  fiction  or  fact,  a  splendid 
product  of  religious  genius  or  a  living  Saviour? 

Few  questions  have  caused  profounder  agitation  in  the  modern 
Church.  The  question  cannot  be  separated  from  the  question  of 
authorship.  Clearly  if  the  book  was  written  by  an  intimate  friend 
of  Jesus,  its  witness  must  be  true.  Who  wrote  the  Fourth  Gospel? 
This  question  is  of  vital  importance. 

2.     THE  TRADITION 

At  the  close  of  the  second  century — the  earliest  period  from  which 
any  really  abundant  Christian  literature  outside  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment has  been  preserved — the  tradition  about  the  authorship  of 
the  Gospel  was  practically  unanimous.  Even  the  one  small  and 
uninfluential  sect  that  disagreed  practically  supports  the  common 
view,  for  its  denial  was  evidently  based  upon  objections  to  the  con- 
tents of  the  Gospel  and  not  at  all  upon  any  independent  information. 

(1)  Irenaeus  and  Polycarp. — Of  the  three  important  writers  of  the 
close  of  the  second  century,  all  of  whom  attest  the  Johannine 
authorship  of  the  Gospel,  Irenaeus  deserves  special  mention. 
Irenaeus  spent  his  early  life  in  Asia  Minor,  but  afterwards  became 

I65 


1 66  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

the  leader  of  the  Church  in  Gaul.  Before  he  left  Asia  Minor  he  had 
some  very  interesting  associations.  One  of  them  was  with  Polycarp, 
bishop  of  Smyrna,  who  was  martyred  in  A.  D.  155.  Polycarp 
would  be  an  important  figure  merely  on  account  of  the  early  period 
in  which  he  lived;  but  what  makes  his  testimony  supremely  valuable 
is  his  personal  association  with  John.  Irenaeus  himself  in  his  early 
youth,  before  he  had  left  Asia  Minor,  had  heard  Polycarp  discoursing 
about  the  things  he  had  heard  John  say.  Polycarp,  then,  was  a 
personal  disciple  of  John,  and  Irenaeus  was  a  personal  disciple  of 
Polycarp.  Only  one  link,  therefore,  separated  Irenaeus  from  John. 
Moreover,  since  Irenaeus  in  his  youth  had  lived  in  Asia  Minor,  the 
very  place  of  John's  residence,  it  is  natural  to  believe  that  what  he 
heard  Polycarp  say  about  John  could  be  supplemented  in  other  ways. 

Now  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt  whatever,  Irenaeus  supposed 
that  the  John  of  whom  he  had  heard  Polycarp  speak  was  none  other 
than  John  the  apostle,  the  son  of  Zebedee.  If  that  supposition  was 
correct,  then  the  connection  between  Irenaeus  and  the  apostle  John 
was  exceedingly  close;  and  when  Irenaeus  exhibits  an  absolutely  un- 
wavering belief  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  written  by  the  apostle, 
it  is  very  unlikely  that  he  was  mistaken.  He  had  known  one  of  the 
personal  disciples  of  John;  he  himself  had  lived  in  Asia  Minor  where 
John  had  been  the  well-known  leader  of  the  Church,  and  where  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  no  matter  who  wrote  it,  was  almost  certainly  pro- 
duced. When,  therefore,  he  asserts,  not  as  something  new,  but 
as  a  thing  which  he  had  known  from  the  beginning,  that  the  Fourth 
Gospel  was  written  by  the  apostle  John,  surely  he  must  be  believed. 

This  conclusion  has  been  avoided  by  the  hypothesis  that  the  John 
about  whom  Polycarp  spoke  was  not  really,  as  Irenaeus  supposed, 
John  the  son  of  Zebedee,  but  another  John,  a  certain  John  the 
presbyter,  who  was  not  one  of  the  twelve  apostles  at  all.  The  un- 
naturalness  of  such  an  hypothesis  appears  on  the  surface.  Could 
a  native  of  Asia  Minor  who  had  repeatedly  heard  Polycarp  speak- 
about  the  John  in  question,  and  who  had  many  other  opportunities 
for  acquainting  himself  with  the  traditions  of  the  church  in  Asia 
Minor — could  such  a  man,  together  with  all  his  contemporaries, 
have  come  to  labor  under  so  egregious  a  misapprehension? 

(2)  Other  Attestation. — The  testimony  of  Irenaeus  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel  is  of  particular  importance,  on  account  of  Irenaeus'  connec- 
tion with  Polycarp.  But  it  is  only  one  detail  in  a  remarkable 
consensus.  When  the  most  widely  separated  portions  of  the 
Church  before  the  close  of  the  second  century  all  agreed  that  the 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  BELOVED  DISCIPLE      167 

Fourth  Gospel  was  written  by  John  the  son  of  Zebedee,  their  com- 
mon belief  could  not  have  been  of  recent  origin.  Earlier  writers, 
moreover,  by  their  use  of  the  Gospel  attest  at  least  its  early  date. 

3.     THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  GOSPEL  ITSELF 

The  tradition  which  attributes  the  Fourth  Gospel  to  John  the  son 
of  Zebedee  is  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  the  Gospel  itself.  Al- 
though the  book  does  not  mention  the  name  of  its  author  it  clearly 
implies  who  he  was. 

(1)  Indirectness  of  the  Testimony. — This  testimony  of  the  Gospel 
itself  is  all  the  more  valuable  because  it  is  indirect.  If  the  name 
John  had  been  mentioned  at  the  beginning,  then  it  might  con- 
ceivably be  supposed  that  an  unknown  author  had  desired  to  gain 
a  hearing  for  his  work  by  putting  it  falsely  under  the  name  of  a  great 
apostle.  As  it  is,  the  inference  that  the  author  claims  to  be  John 
the  son  of  Zebedee,  though  certain,  does  not  force  itself  upon  the 
careless  reader.  A  forger  would  not  thus,  by  the  indirectness  of 
his  claim,  have  deprived  himself  of  the  benefits  of  his  forgery. 

The  testimony  of  the  Gospel  to  its  author  must  now  be  considered. 

(2)  The  Author  an  Eyewitness. — In  the  first  place,  almost  at  the 
very  beginning,  we  observe  that  the  author  claims  to  be  an  eye- 
witness of  the  life  of  Jesus.  "We  beheld  his  glory,"  he  says  in  John 
1  :  14.  By  beholding  the  glory  of  Christ  he  evidently  does  not  mean 
merely  that  experience  of  Christ's  power  which  is  possessed  by  every 
Christian.  On  the  contrary,  the  glory  of  Christ,  as  it  is  intended  by 
the  evangelist,  is  fully  explained  by  such  passages  as  ch.  2  :  11. 
The  miracles  of  Jesus — palpable,  visible  events  in  the  external 
world — are  clearly  included  in  what  is  meant.  It  will  be  observed 
that  in  ch.  1  :  14  it  is  very  specifically  the  incarnate  Christ  that  is 
spoken  of.  The  evangelist  is  describing  the  condition  of  things 
after  "the  Word  became  flesh."  Evidently,  therefore,  it  was  the 
earthly  life  of  Jesus  which  the  evangelist  claims  to  have  "beheld." 

This  conclusion  is  confirmed  by  I  John  1  :  1-4.  Scarcely  anyone 
doubts  that  the  First  Epistle  of  John  was  written  by  the  man  who 
wrote  the  Gospel.  When,  therefore,  the  author  of  the  epistle  speaks  of 
"that  which  we  have  heard,  that  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes, 
that  which  we  beheld,  and  our  hands  handled,  concerning  the  Word 
of  life,"  evidently  these  words  have  significance  for  the  Gospel  also. 
The  author  fairly  heaps  up  expressions  to  show,  beyond  all  possi- 
bility of  misunderstanding,  that  he  had  come  into  actual  physical 
contact  with  the  earthly  Jesus. 


1 68  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(3)  The  Unnamed  Disciple  of  John  1  :  35-42. — The  author  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  then,  clearly  claims  to  be  an  eyewitness  of  the 
earthly  life  of  Christ.  Further  indications  identify  him  with  a 
particular  one  among  the  eyewitnesses.  In  John  1  :  35-42,  an  un- 
named disciple  of  Jesus  is  mentioned.  "One  of  the  two,"  it  is  said 
in  v.  40,  "that  heard  John  speak,  and  followed  him,  was  Andrew, 
Simon  Peter's  brother."  Who  was  the  other?  There  is  some  reason 
for  thinking  that  he  was  one  of  the  two  sons  of  Zebedee.  But  the 
matter  will  become  clearer  as  we  proceed. 

Another  question  is  why  this  disciple  is  not  mentioned  by  name. 
The  Fourth  Gospel  is  not  chary  of  names.  Why,  then,  is  the  disciple 
who  appears  so  prominently  along  with  Andrew  and  Simon  not 
mentioned  by  name?  Only  one  plausible  explanation  suggests 
itself — the  explanation  that  the  unnamed  disciple  was  the  author  of 
the  Gospel,  who,  through  a  feeling  common  in  the  literature  of 
antiquity,  as  well  as  of  our  own  time,  did  not  like  to  mention  his  own 
name  in  the  course  of  his  narrative.  We  have  already  observed  that 
the  author  claims  to  be  an  eyewitness  of  the  life  of  Christ.  John 
1  :  14.  When,  therefore,  near  the  beginning  of  the  narrative  a 
disciple  of  Jesus  is  introduced,  rather  mysteriously,  without  a  name, 
when,  furthermore,  events  in  which  this  disciple  was  immediately 
concerned  are  narrated  with  unusual  vividness  and  wealth  of 
detail,  vs.  35-42,  the  conclusion  becomes  very  natural  that  this 
unnamed  disciple  is  none  other  than  the  author  himself. 

(4)  The  Beloved  Disciple. — This  conclusion,  it  must  be  admitted, 
so  far  as  this  first  passage  is  concerned,  is  nothing  more  than  a  likely 
guess.     But  by  other  passages  it  is  rendered  almost  certain. 

In  John  13  :  21-25,  a  disciple  is  mentioned  as  leaning  on  Jesus' 
breast  and  as  being  one  whom  Jesus  loved.  This  disciple  is  not 
named.  But  who  was  he?  Evidently  he  was  one  of  the  twelve 
apostles,  for  only  the  apostles  were  present  at  the  Supper  which  is 
described  in  chs.  13  to  17.  The  disciple  "whom  Jesus  loved," 
however,  was  not  only  among  the  Twelve ;  he  was  evidently  among 
the  innermost  circle  of  the  Twelve.  Such  an  innermost  circle 
appears  clearly  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  It  was  composed  of  Peter 
and  James  and  John.  The  beloved  disciple  was  probably  one  of 
these  three;  and  since  he  is  clearly  distinguished  from  Peter,  ch. 
13  :  24,  he  was  either  James  or  John. 

The  introduction  of  an  unnamed  disciple,  which  seemed  significant 
even  in  John  1  :  35-42,  becomes  yet  far  more  significant  in  the 
present  passage.     In  the  account  of  the  Last  Supper,  a  considerable 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  BELOVED  DISCIPLE      169 

number  of  the  disciples  are  named — Peter,  Judas  Iscariot,  Thomas, 
Philip,  Judas  not  Iscariot — yet  the  disciple  who  is  introduced  with 
especial  emphasis,  whose  very  position  at  table  is  described  with  a 
wealth  of  detail  far  greater  than  is  displayed  in  the  case  of  any  of  the 
others,  is  designated  merely  as  "one  of  his  disciples,  whom  Jesus 
loved."  The  strange  omission  of  this  disciple's  name  can  be  ex- 
plained only  if  he  was  the  author  of  the  book.  Clearly  the  painter 
has  here  introduced  a  modest  portrait  of  himself  in  the  midst  of  his 
great  picture. 

Passing  by  John  18  :  15,  16,  where  "the  other  disciple"  is  probably 
the  author,  and  ch.  19  :  26,  27,  where  the  repetition  of  the  strange 
designation,  "the  disciple  .  .  .  whom  he  [Jesus]  loved,"  confirms  the 
impressions  derived  from  ch.  13 :  21-25,  we  discover  another  important 
indication  in  ch.  19:35.  "And  he  that  hath  seen  hath  borne  witness, 
and  his  witness  is  true:  and  he  knoweth  that  he  saith  true,  that  ye 
also  may  believe."  "He  that  hath  seen"  can  scarcely  refer  to  anyone 
other  than  the  beloved  disciple  who  was  mentioned  just  before  as 
standing  by  the  cross.  In  the  present  verse,  this  beloved  disciple 
is  represented  as  the  one  who  is  now  speaking.  The  identification  of 
the  beloved  disciple  with  the  author  of  the  Gospel,  which  was  implied 
before,  here  becomes  explicit. 

In  John  20  :  1-10,  "the  other  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved"  is  of 
course  the  same  as  the  one  who  appears  in  ch.  13:21-25;  19:26,  27,35. 

(5)  Testimony  of  the  Appendix. — In  John  21  :  7,  20-23,  the  be- 
loved disciple  appears  again,  and  in  v.  24  he  is  identified,  in  so  many 
words,  with  the  writer  of  the  Gospel.  In  this  verse  the  first  person 
plural  is  used ;  other  persons  seem  to  be  associated  with  the  author  in 
commending  the  Gospel  to  the  attention  of  the  Church.  This 
phenomenon  is  explained  if  the  twenty-first  chapter  be  regarded  as 
a  sort  of  appendix,  perhaps  added  at  the  request  of  a  circle  of 
friends.  It  will  be  observed  that  ch.  20  :  30,  31  forms  a  fit  ending 
to  the  book;  what  follows  therefore  appears  the  more  like  an  ap- 
pendix, though  it  was  certainly  written  by  the  author's  own  hand 
and  published  before  his  death  along  with  the  rest  of  the  book. 

(6)  Why  Are  John  and  James  Not  Mentioned  by  Name? — The  con- 
clusion of  our  investigation  is  that  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
indicates  clearly  that  he  was  either  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  sons 
of  Zebedee.  This  conclusion  is  confirmed  by  the  curious  circum- 
stance that  neither  one  of  these  men  is  mentioned  in  the  Gospel  by 
name.  How  did  they  come  to  be  omitted?  They  were  in  the  very 
innermost  circle  of  Jesus'  disciples;  many  apostles  far  less  prominent 


170  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

than  they  are  named  frequently  on  the  pages  of  the  Gospel.  There 
can  be  only  one  solution  of  the  problem:  one  at  least  of  these  men 
is,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  introduced  in  the  Gospel  as  the  beloved  dis- 
ciple, and  the  reason  why  he  is  introduced  in  such  a  curiously 
anonymous  way  and  why  his  brother  also  is  not  named,  is  that  the 
author  felt  a  natural  delicacy  about  introducing  his  own  and  his 
brother's  name  into  a  narrative  of  the  Lord's  life. 

One  statement  that  has  just  been  made  requires  qualification:  it 
is  not  quite  true  that  the  sons  of  Zebedee  are  not  designated  by  name 
in  the  Gospel.  They  are  not  indeed  called  by  their  individual 
names,  but  in  ch.  21  :  2,  they  are  designated  by  the  name  of  their 
father.  Possibly  this  slight  difference  of  usage  between  chapter  21 
and  the  rest  of  the  Gospel  has  something  to  do  with  the  fact  that 
chapter  21  seems  to  be  an  appendix. 

(7)  The  Author  Was  Not  James,  but  John. — The  author  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  then,  identifies  himself  with  one  or  the  other  of  the 
sons  of  Zebedee.  As  to  which  one  of  the  two  is  meant  there  cannot 
be  the  slightest  doubt.  James  the  son  of  Zebedee  was  martyred  in 
A.  D.  44.  Acts  12  :  2.  There  is  abundant  evidence  that  the  Fourth 
Gospel  was  not  written  so  early  as  that;  and  John  21  :  20-23  ap- 
parently implies  that  the  author  lived  to  a  considerable  age.  Evi- 
dently, therefore,  it  is  John  and  not  James  with  whom  the  author 
identifies  himself. 

(8)  Is  the  Gospel's  Own  Testimony  True? — Thus  the  singularly 
strong  tradition  which  attributes  the  Fourth  Gospel  to  John  the  son 
of  Zebedee  is  supported  by  the  independent  testimony  of  the  book 
itself.  Conceivably,  of  course,  that  testimony  might  be  false.  But 
it  is  very  hard  to  believe  that  it  is.  It  is  very  hard  to  believe  that 
the  author  of  this  wonderful  book,  who  despite  all  the  profundity  of 
his  ideas  exalts  in  a  very  special  manner  the  importance  of  simple 
testimony  based  upon  the  senses,  John  19  :  35;  I  John  1  :  1-4,  has 
in  a  manner  far  subtler  and  more  heinous  than  if  he  had  simply  put 
a  false  name  at  the  beginning  palmed  himself  off  as  an  eyewitness  of 
the  Saviour's  life.  Many  learned  men  have  found  it  possible  to 
accept  such  a  view;  but  the  simple  reader  of  the  Gospel  will  always 
be  inclined  to  dissent.  The  author  of  this  book  has  narrated  many 
things  hard  to  be  believed.  But  there  are  still  found  those  who 
accept  his  solemn  testimony;  there  are  still  found  those  in  whom  the 
purpose  of  the  book  is  achieved,  who  through  this  Gospel  believe 
that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  believing  have  life  in 
his  name.     John  20  :  31. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  BELOVED  DISCIPLE      171 

4.     TRADITIONAL  TIME  AND  PLACE  AND  PLAN 

The  tradition  about  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  not  confined  to  the  bare 
fact  of  Johannine  authorship;  it  has  preserved  certain  other  very 
interesting  information. 

(1)  The  Ephesian  Residence. — For  example,  tradition  represents 
the  Fourth  Gospel  as  written  after  the  other  three  Gospels  and  at 
Ephesus.  The  evidence  for  the  Ephesian  residence  of  the  apostle 
John  is  singularly  abundant  and  weighty;  and  the  contrary  evidence 
which  has  been  thought  to  attest  an  early  death  of  John  is  exceed- 
ingly weak.  At  first,  John,  like  the  others  of  the  original  apostles, 
remained  in  Palestine.  He  appears  in  Jerusalem  a  little  before 
A.  D.  50  at  the  Apostolic  Council.  Gal.  2:9.  At  some  subsequent 
time,  perhaps  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war  in  A.  D.  66,  he 
journeyed  to  Asia  Minor  and  there  for  many  years  was  the  revered 
head  of  the  Church.  He  lived  indeed  until  the  reign  of  Trajan, 
which  began  in  A.  D.  98. 

(2)  The  Gospel  of  John  Supplementary  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels. — 
According  to  tradition,  the  Gospel  of  John  was  not  only  written  after 
the  Synoptic  Gospels,  but  was  intended  to  be  supplementary  to 
them.  This  information  is  amply  confirmed  by  the  Gospel  itself. 
Evidently  John  presupposes  on  the  part  of  his  readers  a  knowledge 
of  the  Synoptic  account.  This  explains  his  peculiar  choice  of  material 
— for  example,  his  omission  of  most  of  the  Galilean  ministry,  and  of 
such  events  as  the  baptism  and  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
It  explains  also,  for  example,  a  verse  like  John  3  :  24:  "For  John  was 
not  yet  cast  into  prison."  The  Synoptic  Gospels  begin  their  account 
of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  with  what  happened  after  the  imprisonment 
of  John  the  Baptist.  Mark  1  :  14.  Readers  of  Mark  might  even 
receive  the  impression  that  Jesus  had  not  begun  his  teaching  till 
after  that  time.     John  corrects  any  such  impression  in  ch.  3  :  24. 

If,  then,  the  Gospel  of  John  is  intended  not  to  compete  with  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  but  to  supplement  them,  in  what  direction  does 
the  supplementing  move?  What  is  it  that  John  adds  to  what  had 
already  been  told?     Here,  again,  tradition  affords  us  useful  hints. 

Eusebius,  in  the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century,  writes  as  follows 
(Church  History,  iii,  24,  7-13,  translated  by  McGiffert,  in  "Nicene 
and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,"  second  series,  vol.  i,  p.  153): 

"And  when  Mark  and  Luke  had  already  published  their  Gospels, 
they  say  that  John,  who  had  employed  all  his  time  in  proclaiming 
the  Gospel  orally,  finally  proceeded  to  write  for  the  following  reason. 
The  three  Gospels  already  mentioned  [Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke] 


173  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

having  come  into  the  hands  of  all  and  into  his  own  too,  they  say 
that  he  accepted  them  and  bore  witness  to  their  truthfulness;  but 
that  there  was  lacking  in  them  an  account  of  the  deeds  done  by 
Christ  at  the  beginning  of  his  ministry.  And  this  indeed  is  true. 
For  it  is  evident  that  the  three  evangelists  recorded  only  the  deeds 
done  by  the  Saviour  for  one  year  after  the  imprisonment  of  John 
the  Baptist,  and  indicated  this  in  the  beginning  of  their  account. 
For  Matthew,  after  the  forty  days'  fast  and  the  temptation  which 
followed  it,  indicates  the  chronology  of  his  work  when  he  says: 
'Now  when  he  heard  that  John  was  delivered  up  he  withdrew  from 
Judea  into  Galilee.'  Mark  likewise  says:  'Now  after  that  John  was 
delivered  up  Jesus  came  into  Galilee.'  And  Luke,  before  com- 
mencing his  account  of  the  deeds  of  Jesus,  similarly  marks  the  time, 
when  he  says  that  Herod,  'adding  to  all  the  evil  deeds  which  he  had 
done,  shut  up  John  in  prison.'  They  say,  therefore,  that  the  apostle 
John,  being  asked  to  do  it  for  this  reason,  gave  in  his  Gospel  an 
account  of  the  period  which  had  been  omitted  by  the  earlier 
evangelists,  and  of  the  deeds  done  by  the  Saviour  during  that  period ; 
that  is,  of  those  which  were  done  before  the  imprisonment  of  the 
Baptist.  And  this  is  indicated  by  him,  they  say,  in  the  following 
words:  'This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus';  and  again  when  he 
refers  to  the  Baptist,  in  the  midst  of  the  deeds  of  Jesus,  as  still 
baptizing  in  .'Enon  near  Salim;  where  he  states  the  matter  clearly 
in  the  words:  'For  John  was  not  yet  cast  into  prison.'  John  ac- 
cordingly, in  his  Gospel,  records  the  deeds  of  Christ  which  were 
performed  before  the  Baptist  was  cast  into  prison,  but  the  other 
three  evangelists  mention  the  events  which  happened  after  that 
time.  One  who  understands  this  can  no  longer  think  that  the 
Gospels  are  at  variance  with  one  another,  inasmuch  as  the  Gospel 
according  to  John  contains  the  first  acts  of  Christ,  while  the  others 
give  an  account  of  the  latter  part  of  his  life.  And  the  genealogy  of 
our  Saviour  according  to  the  flesh  John  quite  naturally  omitted, 
because  it  had  been  already  given  by  Matthew  and  Luke,  and  began 
with  the  doctrine  of  his  divinity,  which  had,  as  it  were,  been  re- 
served for  him,  as  their  superior,  by  the  divine  Spirit." 

According  to  Eusebius,  then,  John  intended  to  treat  the  time 
before  the  imprisonment  of  the  Baptist  as  the  Synoptists  treated 
the  time  after  that  event.  We  have  already  noted  the  element  of 
truth  in  this  observation.  Of  course  it  is  not  the  only  observation 
that  needs  to  be  made.  Much  of  what  John  narrates  occurred  after 
the  imprisonment  of  the  Baptist. 


THE  TESTLVIONY  OF  THE  BELOVED  DISCIPLE       1 73 

According  to  Clement  of  Alexandria,  of  the  close  of  the  second 
century,  who  here  reports  what  had  been  said  by  his  predecessors  in 
Alexandria,  John,  seeing  that  "bodily"  matters  had  been  treated  by 
the  Synoptists,  supplemented  their  work  by  writing  a  "spiritual" 
Gospel.  In  this  testimony  also  there  is  no  doubt  an  element  of 
truth.  It  is  true  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  reproduces  certain  pro- 
found elements  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  which  in  the  earlier  Gospels 
appear  only  incidentally. 

The  oral  tradition  which  forms  the  chief  basis  of  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  was  rooted  deep  in  the  earliest  missionary  activity  of  the 
Church.  Especially,  perhaps,  in  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  but  also  in 
Matthew  and  Luke,  we  have  for  the  most  part  those  facts  about 
Jesus  and  those  elements  of  his  teaching  which  could  appeal  at  once 
to  simple-minded  believers  or  to  outsiders.  The  Gospel  of  John,  on 
the  other  hand,  drawing,  like  the  others,  from  the  rich  store  of  Jesus' 
teaching  and  Jesus'  person,  has  revealed  yet  deeper  mysteries.  In 
this  profound  book,  we  have  the  recollections  of  a  beloved  disciple, 
at  first  understood  only  imperfectly  by  the  apostle  himself,  but 
rendered  ever  clearer  by  advancing  experience,  and  firmly  fixed  by 
being  often  repeated  in  the  author's  oral  instruction  of  the  Church. 


In  The  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  article  on 
"John"  (7):  Purves,  article  on  "John,  Gospel  according  to  St."  M'Cly- 
mont,  "The  New  Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  33-40.  Stevens  and 
Burton,  "A  Harmony  of  the  Gospels."  Westcott,  "The  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  St.  John:  The  Authorized  Version  with  Introduction  and  Notes." 
"The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools":  Plummer,  "The  Gospel  According 
to  St.  John."  Browning,  "A  Death  in  the  Desert"  (vol.  iv,  pp.  191- 
206  of  the  Riverside  Edition).  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment," vol.  iii,  pp.  174-355.  The  last-named  work  is  intended  primarily 
for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by 
others. 


LESSON   XXXI 
THE  JESUS  OF  THE  GOSPELS 


It  is  possible  to  speak  of  "the  Jesus  of  the  Gospels"  only  if  the 
Gospels  are  in  essential  agreement.  If  the  features  of  the  four 
portraits  are  so  different  that  they  never  could  have  been  united 
really  in  the  same  person,  then  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  Jesus  of 
the  Gospels,  but  only  a  Jesus  of  Matthew  and  a  Jesus  of  Mark  and 
a  Jesus  of  Luke  and  a  Jesus  of  John. 

1.     AGREEMENT  AMONG  THE  SYNOPTISTS 

Among  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  at  any  rate,  no  such  difference 
exists.  Though  every  one  of  these  Gospels  possesses  its  own 
characteristics,  the  peculiarities  are  almost  negligible  in  comparison 
with  the  underlying  unity.  There  is  certainly  such  a  thing  as  "the 
Synoptic  Jesus."  His  words  and  deeds  are  narrated  in  each  of  the 
Gospels  in  a  different  selection  and  in  a  different  style,  but  the 
characteristic  features  are  everywhere  the  same. 

2.     THE  SYNOPTISTS  AND  JOHN 

With  regard  to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  matter  is  not  quite  so  plain. 
The  contrast  between  the  Synoptists  and  John  has  already  been 
noticed.  It  forces  itself  upon  even  the  most  casual  reader.  Differ- 
ence, however,  is  not  necessarily  contradiction.  It  may  be  due  to 
a  difference  in  the  point  of  view.  Both  the  Synoptists  and  John 
give  a  true  picture  of  Jesus;  the  same  features  appear  very  different 
when  viewed  from  different  angles. 

3.     DIVINITY  AND  HUMANITY 

At  any  rate,  if  there  is  a  contradiction  between  the  first  three 
Gospels  and  the  Gospel  of  John,  the  contradiction  is  by  no  means 
easy  to  formulate.  It  cannot  be  said,  for  example,  simply  that  the 
Synoptists  present  a  human  Jesus  and  John  a  divine  Jesus.  What- 
ever the  differences  among  the  four  Gospels,  all  four  agree  at  least 
in  two  essential  features.  All  four  present  Jesus,  in  the  first  place 
as  a  man,  and  in  the  second  place  as  something  more  than  a  man. 

174 


THE  JESUS  OF  THE  GOSPELS  175 

(1)  Humanity  in  the  Synoptists. — The  former  feature  is  perhaps 
especially  clear  in  the  Synoptists.  According  to  the  first  three 
Gospels,  Jesus  led  a  genuine  human  life  from  birth  to  death.  As  a 
child  he  grew  not  only  in  stature,  but  also  in  wisdom.  He  was 
subject  to  human  parents  and  to  the  requirements  of  the  Jewish  law. 
Even  after  the  inauguration  of  his  ministry  the  human  conditions  of 
his  life  were  not  superseded.  He  was  even  tempted  like  other  men. 
He  grew  weary  and  slept.  He  suffered  hunger  and  thirst.  He 
could  rejoice  and  he  could  suffer  sorrow.  He  prayed,  like  other  men, 
and  worshiped  God.  He  needed  strengthening  both  for  body  and 
for  mind.  No  mere  semblance  of  a  human  life  is  here  presented, 
but  a  genuine  man  of  flesh  and  blood. 

(2)  Humanity  in  John. — But  if  the  Jesus  of  the  Synoptists  is  a  true 
man,  how  is  it  with  the  Jesus  of  John?  Does  the  Fourth  Gospel 
present  merely  a  heavenly  being  who  walked  through  the  world  un- 
touched and  unruffled  by  the  sin  and  misery  and  weakness  that  sur- 
rounded him?  Only  a  very  superficial  reading  can  produce  such  an 
impression.  The  Fourth  Gospel  indeed  lays  a  supreme  emphasis 
upon  the  majesty  of  Jesus,  upon  his  "glory"  as  it  was  manifested  in 
works  of  power  and  attested  by  God  himself.  But  side  by  side  with 
these  features  of  the  narrative,  as  though  to  prevent  a  possible  mis- 
understanding, the  author  presents  the  humanity  of  Jesus  with 
drastic  touches  that  can  scarcely  be  paralleled  in  the  Synoptists 
themselves.  It  is  John  who  speaks  of  the  weariness  of  Jesus  at  the 
well  of  Samaria,  ch.  4:6;  of  the  human  affection  which  he  felt  for 
Lazarus  and  Martha  and  Mary,  ch.  11  :  3,  5,  36,  and  for  an  individ- 
ual among  the  disciples,  ch.  13  :  23;  of  his  weeping,  ch.  11  :  35;  and 
indignant  groaning,  v.  38;  and  of  his  deadly  thirst.  Ch.  19  :  28.  As 
clearly  as  the  other  evangelists  John  presents  Jesus  as  a  man. 

(3)  Divinity  in  John. — In  the  second  place,  all  four  Gospels,  if  they 
present  Jesus  as  a  man,  also  present  him  as  something  far  more  than 
a  man.  With  regard  to  the  Gospel  of  John,  of  course  the  matter  is 
unmistakable.  The  very  first  verse  reads:  "In  the  beginning  was 
the  Word,  and  the  Wrord  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God." 
Jesus  according  to  John  was  plainly  no  product  of  the  world,  but 
God  come  in  the  flesh.  John  1  :  14.  The  teaching  of  Jesus  himself, 
as  it  is  reported  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  is  concerned  with  the  relation 
of  perfect  unity  that  exists  between  the  Father  and  the  Son. 

(4)  Divinity  in  the  Synoptists. — In  the  Synoptists  the  supernatural 
character  of  Jesus  is  somewhat  less  on  the  surface.  His  teaching,  as 
the  Synoptists  report  it,  is  largely  concerned  not  directly  with  his 


176  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

own  person,  but  with  the  kingdom  that  he  came  to  found.  Even 
his  Messiahship  is  often  kept  in  the  background;  the  demons  are 
often  commanded  not  to  reveal  it. 

A  closer  examination,  however,  reveals  the  essential  unity  be- 
tween the  Synoptists  and  John.  If  the  supernatural  character  of 
Jesus  appears  in  the  Synoptists  less  plainly  on  the  surface,  it  is 
really  no  less  pervasive  at  the  center.  It  does  not  so  often  form  the 
subject  of  direct  exposition,  but  it  is  everywhere  presupposed.  The 
doing  by  Jesus  of  what  only  God  can  do,  Mark  2:5,7;  the  sovereign 
way  in  which  he  legislates  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  Matt.  5  :  17-48 ;  his 
unearthly  holiness  and  complete  lack  of  any  consciousness  of  sin ;  the 
boundlessness  of  his  demand  for  obedience,  Luke  9  :  57-62;  his  ex- 
pected freedom  from  limitations  of  time  and  place,  Matt.  28  :  20; 
the  absolutely  central  place  which  he  claims  for  himself  as  ruler  and 
judge;  the  substantiation  of  all  his  lofty  claims  by  wonderful  power 
over  the  forces  of  nature — these  are  only  indications  chosen  almost 
at  random  of  what  is  really  plain  upon  every  page  of  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  that  the  Jesus  who  is  there  described  is  no  mere  human 
figure  but  a  divine  Saviour  of  the  world.  The  invitation  of  Matt. 
11  :  28-30,  which  is  typical  of  the  Synoptic  teaching,  would  have  been 
absurd  on  the  lips  of  anyone  but  the  Son  of  God. 

Moreover,  the  divine  nature  of  Jesus  is  not  merely  implied  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels;  there  are  times  when  it  even  becomes  explicit. 
The  relation  of  perfect  mutual  knowledge  that  exists  between  Jesus 
and  the  Father,  Matt.  11  :  27,  reveals  a  perfect  unity  of  nature. 
The  Jesus  of  the  Synoptists,  as  well  as  the  Jesus  of  John,  might  say, 
"I  and  the  Father  are  one." 

4.     THE  MANNER  OF  JESUS'  TEACHING 

The  Synoptic  Gospels,  therefore,  imply  everywhere  exactly  the 
same  Jesus  who  is  more  expressly  presented  in  the  Gospel  of  John. 
If,  then,  there  is  a  contradiction  between  the  Synoptists  and  John, 
it  can  be  concerned  only  with  the  manner  of  Jesus'  teaching.  The 
Synoptists  as  well  as  John  present  Jesus  as  a  supernatural  person,  it 
is  said,  but  unlike  John  they  represent  him  as  keeping  his  own  person 
in  the  background. 

Even  here,  however,  maturer  consideration  shows  that  the 
difference  does  not  amount  to  anything  like  contradiction.  May 
not  the  same  person  have  spoken  the  discourses  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
and  also  those  of  the  Synoptists?  It  must  be  remembered  that  the 
ministry  of  Jesus  was  varied,  and  that  the  first  three  evangelists 


THE  JESUS  OF  THE  GOSPELS  1 77 

confine  themselves  almost  exclusively  to  one  phase  of  it.  In  the 
public  Galilean  ministry,  which  the  Synoptists  describe,  it  was 
necessary  for  Jesus  to  keep  even  his  Messiahship  for  a  time  in  the 
background.  Publication  of  it,  owing  to  the  false  political  concep- 
tion which  the  Jews  had  of  the  Messiah's  work,  would  have  been 
fatal  to  Jesus'  plan.  Here,  as  so  often,  the  Fourth  Gospel  explains 
the  other  three.  After  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand,  John  tells  us, 
the  crowd  wanted  to  take  Jesus  by  force  and  make  him  a  king. 
John  6  :  15.  Popularity  was  dangerous.  Jesus  could  not  proclaim 
himself  publicly  as  the  Messiah,  until  by  explaining  the  spiritual 
nature  of  the  kingdom  he  had  prepared  the  people  for  the  kind  of 
Messiah  which  it  was  his  mission  to  be. 

Of  course,  it  is  difficult  for  us  to  understand  at  every  point  just 
why  Jesus  acted  as  he  did.  All  that  we  are  now  maintaining  is  that 
the  considerations  just  adduced,  and  others  like  them,  show  that  it 
is  perfectly  conceivable  that  Jesus,  before  his  intimate  disciples  and 
in  Jerusalem  and  at  a  special  crisis,  John,  ch.  6,  adopted  a  method  of 
teaching  which  in  the  greater  part  of  the  Galilean  ministry  he  con- 
sidered out  of  place.  There  is  room  in  a  true  narrative  of  Jesus'  life 
both  for  the  Synoptists  and  for  John. 

5.     THE  COMPREHENSIVENESS  OF  JESUS 

Jesus  was  many-sided.  He  was  Lawgiver,  he  was  Teacher,  he 
was  Healer,  he  was  Ruler,  he  was  Saviour.  He  was  man  and  he  was 
God.  The  Gospels  have  presented  him  in  the  richness  of  his  mys- 
terious person.  Modern  historians  are  less  comprehensive.  They 
have  been  offended  at  the  manifoldness  of  the  Gospel  picture.  They 
have  endeavored  to  reduce  Jesus  to  the  level  of  what  they  can  com- 
prehend. But  their  effort  has  been  a  failure.  After  the  supposed 
contradictions  have  been  removed,  greater  contradictions  remain; 
and  the  resulting  figure  is  at  any  rate  too  small  to  account  for  the 
origin  of  Christianity.  The  partial  Jesus  of  modern  criticism, 
despite  his  comparative  littleness,  is  a  monstrosity;  the  comprehen- 
sive Jesus  of  the  Gospels,  though  mysterious,  is  a  self-evidencing  and 
life-giving  fact. 


In  the  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves, 
article  on  "Jesus  Christ."  Warfield,  "The  Lord  of  Glory,"  pp.  125-173. 
Robertson,  "Epochs  in  the  Life  of  Jesus."  Stalker,  "The  Life  of  Jesus 
Christ."  Denney,  "Jesus  and  the  Gospel."  Andrews,  "The  Life  of 
Our  Lord." 

Sea.  T.  m.  3. 


LESSON   XXXII 

A  DOCUMENT  OF  THE  JERUSALEM  CHURCH 
The  Epistle  of  James 


1.     THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  JAMES 

The  Epistle  of  James  has  been  called  the  least  Christian  book  in 
the  New  Testament.  Superficially  this  judgment  is  true.  The 
name  of  Jesus  occurs  only  twice  in  the  epistle,  James  1  :  1 ;  2  :  1,  and 
there  is  no  specific  reference  to  his  life  and  death  and  resurrection. 
A  close  examination,  however,  reverses  the  first  impression. 

(1)  James  and  the  Synoptic  Discourses. — In  the  first  place,  the 
ethical  teaching  of  James  is  permeated  by  the  spirit  of  Jesus.  Even  the 
form  of  the  epistle  displays  a  marked  affinity  for  the  discourses  of  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  and  the  affinity  in  content  is  even  more  apparent. 
Many  striking  parallels  could  be  cited;  but  what  is  more  convincing 
than  such  details  is  the  indefinable  spirit  of  the  whole.  The  way  in 
which  James  treats  the  covetousness,  the  pride,  the  heartlessness, 
the  formalism,  the  pettiness  and  the  meanness  of  his  readers,  is 
strikingly  similar  to  the  way  in  which  his  Master  dealt  with  the 
Pharisees.  James  does  not  indeed  actually  cite  the  words  of  Jesus; 
but  the  absence  of  citations  makes  the  underlying  similarity  all  the 
more  significant.  The  writer  of  this  epistle  did  not  live  at  a  time 
when  the  knowledge  of  the  words  of  Jesus  was  derived  from  books; 
rather  he  had  himself  listened  to  the  Master — even  though  he  was 
not  at  first  a  disciple — and  was  living  in  a  community  where  the 
impression  of  Jesus'  teaching  and  Jesus'  person  was  still  fresh  in  the 
memory  of  those  who  had  known  him  on  earth. 

(2)  James  and  Christian  Doctrine. — In  the  second  place,  moreover, 
the  Christianity  of  James  is  religious  as  well  as  ethical.  Of  course 
it  could  not  be  like  the  teaching  of  Jesus  if  it  were  merely  ethical ;  for 
everything  that  Jesus  taught  even  about  the  simplest  matters  of 
human  conduct  was  determined  by  the  thought  of  the  heavenly 
Father  and  by  the  significance  of  his  own  person.  But  by  the 
religious  character  of  the  Epistle  of  James  even  more  than  this  is 
meant.  Like  all  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  James  was  well 
aware  of  the  saving  significance  of  Jesus'  death  and  resurrection. 
For  him  as  well  as  for  the  others,  Jesus  was  Lord,  ch.  1:1,  and  a 
Lord  who  was  possessed  of  a  heavenly  glory.     Ch.  2:1.     James,  as 

178 


A  DOCUMENT  OF  THE  JERUSALEM  CHURCH        1 79 

well  as  the  others,  was  waiting  for  the  second  coming  of  Christ. 
Ch.  5:8.  He  does  not  directly  refer  to  the  saving  events  that  form 
the  substance  of  Christian  faith;  but  he  takes  them  everywhere  for 
granted.  The  word  of  truth  through  which  the  disciples  have  been 
formed  by  God,  ch.  1  :  18,  the  implanted  word,  v.  21,  that  needs 
ever  to  be  received  anew,  can  hardly  be  anything  else  than  the 
apostolic  gospel  as  it  was  proclaimed  in  the  earliest  speeches  of 
Peter  which  are  recorded  in  The  Acts,  and  as  it  found  its  rich  un- 
folding in  the  teaching  of  Paul.  Just  because  that  gospel  in  our 
epistle  is  presupposed,  it  does  not  need  to  be  expounded  in  detail. 
The  men  to  whom  James  was  writing  were  not  lacking  in  orthodoxy. 
If  they  had  been,  he  would  have  set  them  right,  and  we  should  have 
had  another  exposition  of  the  gospel.  As  a  matter  of  fact  their  fault  was 
in  practice,  not  in  theory ;  and  it  is  in  the  sphere  of  practice  that  they 
are  met  by  James.  The  epistle  would  be  insufficient  if  it  stood  alone. 
It  does  not  lay  the  foundation  of  Christian  faith.  But  it  shows  how, 
upon  that  foundation,  may  be  built  not  the  wood,  hay  and  stubble 
of  a  wordy  orthodoxy,  but  the  gold  and  silver  and  precious  stones  of 
an  honest  Christian  life. 

This  epistle,  then,  might  be  misleading  if  taken  by  itself ;  but  it  be- 
comes salutary  if  it  is  understood  in  its  historical  connections.  Far 
from  disparaging  Christian  doctrine — as  the  modern  Church  is 
tempted  to  suppose — it  builds  upon  doctrine.  In  that  it  agrees 
with  the  whole  of  the  Bible.  Christianity,  as  has  been  finely  said, 
is  a  life  only  because  it  is  a  doctrine.  Only  the  great  saving  events 
of  the  gospel  have  rendered  possible  a  life  like  that  which  is  described 
in  the  Epistle  of  James.  And  where  the  gospel  is  really  accepted  with 
heart  as  well  as  mind,  that  life  of  love  will  always  follow. 

2.     DATE   AND   AUTHENTICITY   OF  THE   EPISTLE 

The  view  which  will  be  held  about  the  date  of  the  Epistle  of  James 
will  depend  very  largely  upon  the  interpretation  of  the  passage  about 
faith  and  works.  James  2  :  14-26.  In  that  passage,  some  of  the 
same  terms  appear  as  are  prominent  in  connection  with  the  great 
Judaistic  controversy  in  which  Paul  was  engaged  from  the  time  of 
the  Apostolic  Council  to  the  time  of  the  third  missionary  journey. 
Three  views  have  been  held  with  regard  to  the  date  of  the  Epistle 
of  James.  The  epistle  may  be  regarded  as  written  (1)  before  the 
Judaistic  controversy  arose,  (2)  during  that  controversy  or  while  it 
was  still  fresh  in  men's  minds,  or  (3)  long  after  the  controversy  had 
been  settled. 


180  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(1)  The  Intermediate  Date. — The  second  of  these  three  views  may 
be  eliminated  first.  This  intermediate  view  has  the  advantage  of 
placing  the  epistle  within  the  lifetime  of  James.  It  can  treat  the 
epistle  as  authentic.  It  has  furthermore  the  advantage  of  explaining 
the  coincidences  between  James  2  :  14-26  and  Rom.,  ch.  4.  For  if 
the  epistle  was  written  at  the  very  close  of  the  lifetime  of  James — 
say  about  A.  D.  62,  or,  following  Hegesippus,  A.  D.  66 — the  author 
may  have  become  acquainted  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 

But  the  difficulties  of  this  view  far  overbalance  the  advantages. 
If  James  was  writing  with  Galatians  and  Romans  before  him,  then 
apparently  in  ch.  2  :  24  he  intends  to  contradict  those  epistles.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  however,  as  is  shown  in  the  Student's  Text  Book,  he 
does  not  really  contradict  them,  but  is  in  perfect  harmony  with 
them.  He  has  therefore  gone  out  of  his  way  in  order  to  introduce  a 
formal  contradiction  of  the  great  apostle  to  the  Gentiles  although 
there  is  no  real  contradiction  of  meaning  at  all!  What  could  he 
possibly  gain  by  such  useless  trouble-making?  If  James  really 
wanted  to  combat  Paul's  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  he  would 
have  done  so  very  differently;  and  if  he  did  not  want  to  combat  it, 
he  would  certainly  not  have  uselessly  created  the  appearance  of 
doing  so. 

Perhaps,  however,  James  2  :  14-26  is  a  refutation  not  of  Paul  but 
of  a  misunderstanding  of  Paul.  This  also  is  very  improbable.  If 
the  passage  was  a  refutation  not  of  Paul  but  of  a  misunderstanding 
of  Paul,  why  did  James  not  say  so?  Why  did  he  not  distinguish 
Paul  clearly  from  his  misinterpreters?  Instead  he  has  indulged  use- 
lessly in  a  formal  contradiction  of  Paul,  and  has  in  refutation  of  a 
misunderstanding  of  Paul  not  even  used  the  abundant  materials 
which  Paul  himself  could  offer!  And  where  was  such  a  misunder- 
standing of  Paul  possible  in  Jewish  Christian  circles  of  A.  D.  62? 

What  makes  every  form  of  this  intermediate  dating  impossible  is 
the  total  absence  from  the  epistle  of  any  reference  to  the  question  of 
the  conditions  upon  which  Gentiles  were  to  be  received  into  the 
Church.  In  A.  D.  62  this  question  had  recently  been  the  subject  of 
bitter  controversy.  At  that  time  no  one  could  have  touched  upon 
the  closely  related  topic  of  faith  and  works  as  James  does  and  yet 
have  ignored  so  completely  the  controversial  question. 

Evidently,  therefore,  the  epistle  was  written  either  before  the 
Judaistic  controversy  arose  or  else  long  after  it  was  over. 

(2)  The  Late  Date. — The  latter  view  makes  the  epistle  a  pseudony- 
mous work — it  assumes  that  an  unknown  author  has  here  tried  to 


A  DOCUMENT  OF  THE  JERUSALEM  CHURCH        181 

enhance  the  influence  of  his  work  by  putting  it  under  the  name  of  the 
first  head  of  the  Jerusalem  church.  This  is  of  itself  sufficient  to 
refute  the  late  dating.  For  the  procedure  of  the  supposed  falsifier 
is  quite  incomprehensible.  He  has  chosen  James  as  the  alleged 
author  only  because  of  the  lofty  position  which  James  held,  and  yet 
he  has  designated  him  in  the  first  verse  merely  as  a  simple  Christian! 
The  procedure  of  real  forgers  is  very  different. 

There  are  also,  however,  other  objections  to  the  late  dating. 
Would  any  writer  in  the  second  century,  when  the  authority  of  Paul 
was  well  established,  have  ventured  to  introduce  such  an  apparent 
contradiction  of  Paul  as  appears  in  James  2  :  24?  In  a  writer  of 
A.  D.  150  we  should  have  had  formal  agreement  with  Paul  and 
material  disagreement;  in  the  Epistle  of  James  we  have  formal  dis- 
agreement and  material  harmony.  Apparent  contradiction  of  ex- 
pression combined  with  perfect  unity  of  thought  is  a  sure  sign  of 
independence.  The  Epistle  of  James  has  made  no  use  of  the 
epistles  of  Paul. 

Against  this  conclusion  may  be  urged  only  the  coincidence  that 
James  and  Paul  both  use  the  example  of  Abraham,  and  cite  the  same 
verse,  Gen.  15  :  6,  with  regard  to  him.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  to  every  Jew  Abraham  offered  the  most  obvious  example  in  all 
the  Scriptures.  It  is  possible,  too,  that  the  faith  and  works  of 
Abraham  had  in  pre-Christian  Jewish  circles  already  been  the  sub- 
ject of  controversy.  Furthermore,  James  does  not  confine  himself 
to  Abraham,  but  introduces  Rahab  also,  who  is  not  mentioned  by 
Paul.  The  coincidence  between  Paul  and  James  is  quite  insufficient 
to  overbalance  the  clear  evidence  of  independence. 

(3)  The  Early  Date. — Only  one  hypothesis,  then,  suits  the  facts. 
The  Epistle  of  James  was  clearly  written  before  the  Judaistic  con- 
troversy became  acute  at  the  time  of  the  Apostolic  Council.  In  the 
second  chapter  of  the  epistle,  James  has  used  the  same  terms  that 
became  prominent  in  that  controversy,  but  he  has  used  them  in 
refuting  a  practical,  not  a  theoretical,  error — an  error  that  is  related 
only  indirectly  to  the  great  subject  of  Galatians  and  Romans. 

3.     UNDERLYING   UNITY   OF   THE   EPISTLE 

At  first  sight  the  Epistle  of  James  seems  to  possess  very  little 
unity.  Topic  follows  topic  often  with  little  apparent  connection. 
But  the  connection  between  the  individual  sections  is  closer  than 
appears  at  first;  and  the  epistle  as  a  whole  possesses  at  least  a  perfect 
unity  of  spirit. 


1 82  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(1)  Reality  in  Religion. — The  ruling  tone  of  the  epistle,  which  may 
be  detected  beneath  all  the  varying  exhortations,  is  a  certain  manly 
honesty,  a  certain  fierce  hatred  of  all  sham  and  cant  and  humbug 
and  meanness.     James  is  a  stern  advocate  of  a  practical  religion. 

(2)  Supremacy  of  Religion. — It  must  be  noticed,  however,  that 
the  religion  of  this  writer  is  none  the  less  religious  because  it  is 
practical.  James  is  no  advocate  of  a  "gospel  of  street-cleaning." 
On  the  contrary  he  insists  with  characteristic  vehemence  upon 
personal  piety.  The  same  writer  who  has  been  regarded  as  em- 
phasizing works  at  the  expense  of  faith,  who  might  be  hailed  as  a 
leader  of  those  who  would  make  religion  terminate  upon  man  rather 
than  God,  who  might  be  thought  to  disparage  everything  but 
"social  service" — this  same  writer  is  one  of  the  most  earnest  advo- 
cates of  prayer.  James  1  :  5-8;  4  :  2,  3;  5  :  14-18.  This  apostle  of 
works,  this  supposed  disparager  of  faith,  is  almost  bitter  in  his 
denunciation  of  unbelief!  Ch.  1  :  6-8.  God,  not  man,  according 
to  James,  is  the  author  of  every  perfect  gift.  V.  17.  Prayer  is  the 
remedy  both  for  bodily  and  for  spiritual  ills.  Ch.  5  :  14-18. 
James  lends  no  countenance  to  the  modern  disparagement  of  re- 
ligious devotion.  The  same  uncompromising  severity  with  which 
he  lashes  an  inactive  religion  is  also  applied  just  as  mercilessly  to  an 
irreligious  activity.  Ch.  4  :  13-15.  James  does  not  attack  religion 
in  the  interests  of  reality;  he  attacks  unreality  in  the  interests  of 
religion. 

4.     CONTENTS   OF  THE   EPISTLE 

The  opening  of  the  epistle,  like  that  of  the  letters  contained  in 
Acts  15  :  23-29;  23  :  26-30,  is  constructed  according  to  the  regular 
Greek  form. 

After  the  opening,  James  speaks  first  of  trials  or  temptations. 
Rightly  used  they  will  lead  to  perfection.  If,  however,  there  is 
still  imperfection,  it  can  be  removed  by  prayer  to  God.  The  im- 
perfection which  is  here  especially  in  view  is  an  imperfection  in 
wisdom.  Apparently  the  readers,  like  the  Pharisees,  had  laid  an 
excessive  stress  upon  knowledge.  The  true  wisdom,  says  James,  can 
be  obtained  not  by  human  pride,  as  the  readers  seem  to  think,  but 
only  by  prayer.  Prayer,  however,  must  be  in  faith — there  must  be 
no  wavering  in  it.  Pride,  indeed,  is  altogether  blameworthy.  If 
there  is  to  be  boasting,  it  should  certainly  be  not  in  earthly  wealth 
but  in  those  spiritual  blessings  which  often  reverse  earthly  distinc- 
tions. Returning  to  the  subject  of  temptations,  James  insists  that 
in  their  evil  they  do  not  come  from  God,  but  from  the  depths  of 


A  DOCUMENT  OF  THE  JERUSALEM  CHURCH        183 

man's  own  desires.  From  God  comes  no  evil  thing,  but  every 
perfect  gift;  and  in  the  gospel  God  has  bestowed  upon  us  his  richest 
blessing. 

That  gospel  must  be  received  with  all  diligence.  It  will  exclude 
wrath  and  insincerity.  True  religion  consists  not  merely  in  hearing 
but  in  doing;  good  examples  of  the  exercise  of  it  are  the  visitation  of 
the  fatherless  and  widows  and  the  preservation  of  one's  own  personal 
purity  of  life. 

Faith  in  Christ,  James  continues  in  similar  vein,  excludes  all 
undue  respect  of  persons.  Indeed  God  in  his  choice  of  those  who 
should  be  saved  has  especially  favored  the  poor.  The  rich  as  a 
class  are  rather  the  oppressors  of  the  Christians.  Surely  then  the 
Christians  should  not  favor  rich  men  for  selfish  reasons.  The  law 
of  love  will  exclude  all  such  unworthy  conduct. 

That  law  of  love  requires  an  active  life.  Faith,  if  it  be  true  faith, 
leads  to  works.  Away  with  a  miserable  faith  that  is  expressed  only 
in  words! 

Words,  indeed,  are  dangerous.  The  tongue  is  a  prolific  source  of 
harm.  Evil  speech  reveals  the  deep-seated  corruption  of  the  heart. 
The  readers  must  be  careful,  therefore,  about  seeking  the  work  of  a 
teacher.  The  true  wisdom,  which  fits  a  man  to  teach,  is  not  of 
man's  acquiring,  but  comes  from  God. 

Quarreling — which  was  produced  especially  by  the  inordinate 
ambition  among  the  readers  to  pose  as  teachers — must  be  counter- 
acted by  submission  to  God. 

The  constant  thought  of  God  excludes  all  pride  in  human  planning. 
Especially  the  rich  must  reflect  upon  the  transitoriness  of  earthly 
possessions  and  above  all  must  be  sure  that  their  wealth  is  honestly 
gained. 

Finally,  patient  waiting  for  the  Lord,  the  example  of  the  Old 
Testament  saints,  and  the  earnest  practice  of  prayer  will  make 
effective  all  the  exhortations  of  the  epistle. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  123-138.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Warfield,  articles  on 
"James"  and  "James,  Epistle  of."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testa- 
ment and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  123-129.  Knowling,  "The  Epistle  of 
St.  James."  "The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools":  Plumptre,  "The 
General  Epistle  of  St.  James."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment," vol.  i,  pp.  73-151.  The  last-named  work  is  intended  primarily 
for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used 
by  others. 


LESSON  XXXIII 

JESUS  THE  FULFILLMENT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 


1.     PAUL  NOT  THE   AUTHOR 

(1)  The  Tradition. — At  Alexandria  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second 
century  Paul  was  thought  to  be  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews;  but  in  North  Africa  a  little  later  Tertullian  attributed  the 
epistle  to  Barnabas,  and  in  other  portions  of  the  Church  the  Pauline 
authorship  was  certainly  not  accepted.  In  the  west,  the  Pauline 
authorship  was  long  denied  and  the  inclusion  of  the  epistle  in  the 
New  Testament  resisted.  At  last  the  Alexandrian  view  won  uni- 
versal acceptance.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  became  an 
accepted  part  of  the  New  Testament,  and  was  attributed  to  Paul. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  had  apparently  received  the  tradition 
of  Pauline  authorship  from  Pantsenus,  his  predecessor,  himself 
declares  that  Hebrews  was  written  by  Paul  in  the  "Hebrew" 
(Aramaic)  language,  and  was  translated  by  Luke  into  Greek. 
The  notion  of  a  translation  by  Luke  was  based  upon  no  genuine 
historical  tradition — Hebrews  is  certainly  an  original  Greek  work — 
but  was  simply  an  hypothesis  constructed  to  explain  the  peculiarities 
of  the  epistle  on  the  supposition  that  it  was  a  work  of  Paul. 

(2)  The  Value  of  the  Tradition. — The  tradition  of  Pauline  author- 
ship is  clearly  very  weak.  If  Paul  had  been  the  author,  it  is  hard  to 
see  why  the  memory  of  the  fact  should  have  been  lost  so  generally  in 
the  Church.  No  one  in  the  early  period  had  any  objection  to  the 
epistle;  on  the  contrary  it  was  very  highly  regarded.  If,  then,  it 
had  really  been  written  by  Paul,  the  Pauline  authorship  would  have 
been  accepted  everywhere  with  avidity.  The  negative  testimony  of 
the  Roman  church  is  particularly  significant.  The  epistle  was 
quoted  by  Clement  of  Rome  at  about  A.  D.  95;  yet  at  Rome  as 
elsewhere  in  the  West  the  epistle  seems  never  in  the  early  period  to 
have  been  regarded  as  Pauline.  In  other  words,  just  where  ac- 
quaintance with  the  epistle  can  be  traced  farthest  back,  the  denial 
of  Pauline  authorship  seems  to  have  been  most  insistent.  If 
Clement  of  Rome  had  regarded  Paul  as  the  author,  the  history  of 
Roman  opinion  about  the  epistle  would  have  been  very  different. 

184 


JESUS— FULFILLMENT  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT       185 

On  the  other  hand,  on  the  supposition  that  there  was  originally 
no  tradition  of  Pauline  authorship,  the  subsequent  prevalence  of 
such  a  tradition  is  easily  explained.  It  was  due  simply  to  the 
evident  apostolic  authority  of  the  epistle  itself.  From  the  start,  He- 
brews was  felt  to  be  an  authoritative  work.  Being  authoritative,  it 
would  be  collected  along  with  other  authoritative  works.  Since  it 
was  an  epistle,  and  exhibited  a  certain  Pauline  quality  of  spirit  and 
subject,  it  would  naturally  be  associated  with  the  other  works  of  the 
greatest  letter  writer  of  the  apostolic  age.  Being  thus  included  in  a 
collection  of  the  Pauline  Epistles,  and  being  regarded  as  of  apostolic 
authority,  what  was  more  natural  than  to  attribute  it  to  the  apostle 
Paul?  Such,  very  possibly,  was  the  origin  of  the  Alexandrian 
tradition. 

This  tradition  did  not  win  immediate  acceptance,  because  the 
rest  of  the  Church  was  still  aware  that  the  epistle  was  not  written  by 
Paul.  What  led  to  the  final  conquest  of  the  Pauline  tradition  was 
simply  the  character  of  the  book  itself.  The  question  of  Pauline 
authorship,  in  the  case  of  this  book,  became  connected  with  the 
question  of  apostolic  authority.  The  Church  had  to  choose  between 
rejecting  the  book  altogether,  and  accepting  it  as  Pauline.  When 
she  finally  adopted  the  latter  alternative,  undoubtedly  she  chose  the 
lesser  error.  It  was  an  error  to  regard  the  epistle  as  the  work  of 
Paul ;  but  it  would  have  been  a  far  greater  error  to  exclude  it  from  the 
New  Testament.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  though  the  book  was  not 
written  by  Paul,  it  was  written,  if  not  by  one  of  the  other  apostles,  at 
least  by  an  "apostolic  man"  like  Mark  or  Luke.  Scarcely  any  book 
of  the  New  Testament  bears  clearer  marks  of  true  apostolicity. 

(3)  Internal  Evidence. — The  argument  against  Pauline  authorship 
which  is  derived  from  tradition  is  strongly  supported  by  the  contents 
of  the  epistle  itself.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  exceedingly  doubtful 
whether  Paul  could  have  spoken  of  himself  as  having  had  the 
Christian  salvation  confirmed  to  him  by  those  who  had  heard  the 
Lord.  Heb.  2  :  3.  Knowledge  of  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus  was 
indeed  conveyed  to  Paul  by  ordinary  word  of  mouth  from  the  eye- 
witnesses; but  the  gospel  itself,  as  he  insists  with  vehemence  in 
Galatians,  was  revealed  to  him  directly  by  Christ.  In  the  second 
place,  the  style  of  the  epistle  is  very  different  from  that  of  Paul, 
being,  as  we  shall  see,  far  more  carefully  wrought.  In  the  third 
place,  the  thoughts  developed  in  Hebrews,  though  undoubtedly  they 
are  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  Pauline  Epistles,  are  by  no  means 
characteristically  Pauline.     It  is  a  little  hard  to  understand,  for 


!86  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

example,  how  Paul  could  have  written  at  such  length  about  the  law 
without  speaking  of  justification  by  faith  or  the  reception  of  Gentiles 
into  the  Church.  This  last  argument,  however,  must  not  be  ex- 
aggerated. Undoubtedly  Paul  would  have  agreed  heartily  to 
everything  that  Hebrews  contains.  Paul  and  the  author  of  this 
epistle  have  developed  merely  somewhat  different  sides  of  the  same 
great  truth. 

2.     WHO   WAS  THE   AUTHOR? 

If  Paul  did  not  write  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  who  did  write  it? 
Prodigious  labor  has  been  expended  upon  this  question,  but  with 
very  little  result.  In  ancient  times,  Barnabas,  Luke  and  Clement 
of  Rome,  were  each  regarded  as  the  author.  Of  these  three  views 
the  first  is  most  probable;  the  second  is  exceedingly  unlikely;  and  the 
last  is  clearly  impossible.  Whoever  wrote  the  epistle,  Clement 
certainly  did  not.  The  letter  which  we  possess  from  his  pen  is  im- 
measurably inferior  to  the  apostolic  writings  to  which  Hebrews 
certainly  belongs.  Clement  was  a  humble  reader  of  Hebrews,  not 
the  author  of  it.  Luther  was  inclined  to  regard  Apollos  as  the 
possible  author  of  Hebrews;  and  of  all  the  many  suggestions  that 
have  been  made,  this  is  perhaps  the  best.  Undoubtedly  the  cir- 
cumstances and  training  of  Apollos  were  in  a  number  of  respects 
like  those  which  might  naturally  be  attributed  to  the  author  of  the 
epistle.  Apollos  was  closely  associated  with  Paul,  and  perhaps  at  a 
later  time  with  others  of  the  apostles,  just  as  might  be  expected  of 
the  author  of  an  apostolic  work  such  as  Hebrews.  On  the  other 
hand,  like  the  author  of  the  epistle,  he  was  not  an  eyewitness  of  the 
life  of  Jesus.  Compare  Heb.  2  : 4.  Like  the  author  of  the  epistle 
he  was  no  doubt  acquainted  with  Timothy.  Compare  ch.  13  :  23. 
He  was  an  "eloquent"  or  "learned"  man,  Acts  18  :  24,  who  might 
well  have  produced  the  splendid  rhetoric  of  the  epistle.  He  was  a 
Jew  and  mighty  in  the  Scriptures,  as  was  also  the  author  of  Hebrews. 
He  was  a  native  of  Alexandria,  the  university  city  of  the  period,  and 
the  seat  of  a  large  Jewish  community,  where  just  that  combination 
of  Greek  rhetorical  training  with  Scriptural  knowledge  which  is 
exhibited  in  the  epistle  is  most  naturally  to  be  sought. 

These  indications,  however,  can  merely  show  that  Apoflos  might 
conceivably  have  written  the  epistle ;  they  do  not  show  that  he  did 
write  it.  The  authorship  of  this  powerful  work  will  always  remain 
uncertain.  How  little  we  know,  after  all,  of  the  abounding  life  of 
the  apostolic  Church! 


JESUS— FULFILLMENT  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT        187 

3.     WHERE   WERE  THE   READERS? 

In  the  Student's  Text  Book,  it  has  been  shown  that  the  readers  of 
the  epistle  were  probably  members  of  some  rather  narrowly  cir- 
cumscribed community.  Where  this  community  was  is  by  no 
means  clear.  The  one  indication  of  place  which  the  epistle  contains 
is  ambiguous.  In  ch.  13  :  24  it  is  said,  "They  of  Italy  salute  you." 
These  words  may  mean  that  the  author  is  in  Italy  and  sends  greet- 
ings from  the  Christians  of  that  country,  or  they  may  mean  that  the 
author  is  outside  of  Italy  and  sends  greetings  from  Italian  Christians 
who  happened  to  be  with  him.  In  the  latter  case,  probably  the 
readers  were  in  Italy;  for  otherwise  they  would  have  no  special 
interest  in  the  Italian  Christians.  All  that  we  can  say  is  then  that 
the  epistle  was  probably  written  either  from  Italy  or  to  Italy.  If  it 
was  written  from  Italy,  then  since  the  readers  were  Jews,  it  is  natural 
to  seek  them  in  Palestine.  The  Palestinian  Christians  were  "He- 
brews" in  the  narrower,  linguistic  sense  of  the  word,  as  well  as  in  the 
broader,  national  sense.  The  ancient  heading  of  the  epistle  thus 
comes  to  its  full  rights.  On  the  other  hand  the  Palestinian  hypoth- 
esis faces  some  rather  grave  difficulties.  If  the  readers  are  to  be 
sought  in  Italy,  then  perhaps  they  formed  a  Jewish  Christian  com- 
munity in  Rome  or  in  some  other  Italian  city.  The  question  cannot 
be  settled  with  any  certainty.  The  destination  of  the  epistle  is  an 
even  greater  riddle  than  the  authorship. 

4.     WHEN   WAS  THE   EPISTLE  WRITTEN? 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  certainly  written  before  A.  D.  95, 
for  at  about  that  time  it  was  quoted  by  Clement  of  Rome.  The 
mention  of  Timothy  in  ch.  13  :  23  perhaps  does  not  carry  us  much 
farther,  for  Timothy,  who  was  a  grown  man  at  about  A.  D.  50, 
Acts  16  :  1-3,  may  have  lived  till  the  end  of  the  first  century.  The 
epistle,  however,  does  not  bear  any  of  the  marks  of  late  origin.  The 
question  of  date  is  closely  connected  with  the  question  whether  in 
the  epistle  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  is  regarded  as  still  standing. 
This  question  cannot  be  settled  with  certainty.  But  on  the  whole  the 
continuance  of  the  Levitical  ceremonies  seems  to  be  assumed  in  the 
epistle,  and  at  any  rate  there  is  no  clear  reference  to  their  cessation. 
Probably  therefore  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  written  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  A.  D.  70. 

5.     HEBREWS   A   LITERARY   WORK 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  a  product  of  conscious  literary  art. 


1 88  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

The  rhetoric  of  Paul  is  unconscious;  even  such  passages  as  the  first 
few  chapters  of  First  Corinthians  or  the  eighth  chapter  of  Romans 
may  have  been  composed  with  the  utmost  rapidity.  The  author  of 
Hebrews  probably  went  differently  to  work.  Such  sentences  as 
Heb.  1  :  1-4,  even  in  an  inspired  writer,  can  only  be  the  result  of 
diligent  labor.  By  long  practice  the  writer  of  Hebrews  had  acquired 
that  feeling  for  rhythm  and  balance  of  phrase,  that  facility  in  the 
construction  of  smooth-flowing  periods,  which  give  to  his  epistle  its 
distinctive  quality  among  the  New  Testament  books.  Greek 
rhetoric  of  the  Hellenistic  age,  freed  from  its  hollow  artificiality,  is 
here  laid  under  contribution  for  the  Saviour's  praise. 

The  presence  of  such  a  book  in  the  New  Testament  is  highly 
salutary.  Devout  Christians  in  their  enthusiasm  for  the  simplicity 
of  the  gospel  are  sometimes  in  danger  of  becoming  one-sided.  They 
are  sometimes  inclined  to  confuse  simplicity  with  ugliness,  and  then 
to  prize  ugliness  for  its  own  sake.  It  is  perfectly  true  that  the 
value  of  the  gospel  is  quite  independent  of  aesthetic  niceties,  and  that 
the  language  of  the  New  Testament  is  for  the  most  part  very  simple. 
But  it  is  not  true  that  the  simplicity  of  the  New  Testament  has  any- 
thing in  common  with  the  bad  taste  of  some  modern  phraseology, 
or  that  eloquence  is  of  itself  evil.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
shows  by  a  noble  example  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  Christian  art. 
The  majestic  sentences  of  this  ancient  masterpiece,  with  their 
exquisite  clearness  and  liturgic  rhythm  and  uplifting  power,  have 
contributed  inestimably  to  the  Christian  conception  of  the  Saviour. 
The  art  of  Hebrews  is  not  art  for  art's  sake,  but  art  for  the  sake  of 
Christ.  Literary  perfection  is  here  combined  with  profound 
genuineness  and  apostolic  fervor;  art  is  here  ennobled  by  consecra- 
tion. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  164,  165,  265-267,  286-289.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible": 
Purves,  article  on  "Hebrews,  Epistle  to  the."  M'Clymont,  "The  New 
Testament  and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  1 16-122.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testa- 
ment Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  275-348:  Moulton, 
"The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Hebiews."  Westcott,  "The 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment," vol.  ii,  pp.  293-366.  The  two  last-named  works  are  intended 
primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be 
used  by  others. 


LESSON   XXXIV 

CHRISTIAN  FORTITUDE 
The  First  Epistle  of  Peter 


1.     SEPARATION  FROM  THE  WORLD 

The  First  Epistle  of  Peter  is  the  epistle  of  separaleness.  The 
modern  Church  is  in  grave  clanger  of  forgetting  the  distinctiveness 
of  her  gospel  and  the  glorious  isolation  of  her  position.  She  is  too 
often  content  to  be  merely  one  factor  in  civilization,  a  means  of  im- 
proving the  world  instead  of  the  instrument  in  creating  a  new  world. 

The  first  readers  of  the  epistle  were  subject  to  a  similar  danger, 
though  it  arose  from  a  somewhat  different  cause.  To-day  we  are 
no  longer  subject  to  persecution;  but  the  danger  is  fundamentally 
the  same.  The  world's  friendship  may  be  even  more  disastrous 
than  the  world's  hatred.  The  readers  of  First  Peter  were  tempted 
to  relinquish  what  was  distinctive  in  their  faith  in  order  to  avoid 
the  hostility  of  their  heathen  neighbors;  we  are  tempted  to  do  the 
same  thing  because  the  superficial  respectability  of  modern  life 
has  put  a  gloss  of  polite  convention  over  the  profound  differences 
that  divide  the  inner  lives  of  men.  We,  as  well  as  the  first  readers 
of  the  epistle,  need  to  be  told  that  this  world  is  lost  in  sin,  that  the 
blood  of  Christ  has  ransomed  an  elect  race  from  the  city  of  de- 
struction, that  the  high  privileges  of  the  Christian  calling  demand 
spotless  purity  and  unswerving  courage. 

(1)  The  Character  of  the  Persecution. — The  character  of  the 
persecution  to  which  the  readers  of  the  epistle  were  subjected  cannot 
be  determined  with  perfect  clearness.  It  is  not  even  certain  that 
the  Christian  profession  in  itself  was  regarded  officially  as  a  crime. 
Apparently  charges  of  positive  misconduct  were  needed  to  give 
countenance  to  the  persecutors.  I  Peter  2  :  12.  The  Christians 
needed  to  be  warned  that  there  is  no  heroism  in  suffering  if  the 
suffering  is  the  just  punishment  of  misdeeds.  Chs.  2  :  20;  4  :  15. 
What  particular  charges  were  brought  against  the  Christians  it 
is  of  course  difficult  to  determine.  Perhaps  they  were  sometimes 
charged  with  gross  crimes  such  as  murder  or  theft.  But  a  more 
frequent  accusation  was  probably  "hatred  of  the  human  race,"  or 
the  like.     The   Christians  were   thought   to   be   busybodies.     In 

189 


IQO  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

setting  the  world  to  rights  they  seemed  to  meddle  in  other  people's 
affairs.  In  claiming  to  be  citizens  of  a  heavenly  kingdom,  they 
seemed  indifferent  or  hostile  to  earthly  relationships.  As  subjects 
of  the  emperor  and  of  his  representatives,  the  Christians  were 
thought  to  be  disloyal;  as  slaves,  they  seemed  disobedient. 

(2)  Duties  of  Earthly  Life. — In  view  of  these  accusations,  Peter 
urges  his  readers  to  avoid  all  improper  employment  of  their 
Christian  freedom.  Christian  freedom  does  not  mean  license; 
Christian  independence  does  not  mean  indifference.  There  is  no 
reason  why  a  good  Christian  should  be  a  bad  citizen,  even  of  a 
heathen  state,  ch.  2  :  13-17,  or  an  unprofitable  servant,  even  of  a 
harsh  master,  vs.  18-25,  or  a  quarrelsome  wife,  even  of  an  un- 
converted husband.  Ch.  3  :  1-6.  On  the  contrary,  Christians 
must  approve  themselves  not  only  in  the  spiritual  realm,  but  also 
in  the  ordinary  relationships  of  this  life. 

(3)  Application  to  Modern  Conditions. — Here  again  the  lesson  is 
important  for  the  present  day.  Now  as  always  fervent  realization 
of  the  transcendent  glory  of  Christianity  tends  sometimes  to  result 
in  depreciation  of  ordinary  duties.  Men  of  exceptional  piety  some- 
times seem  to  feel  that  civilization  is  unworthy  of  their  attention, 
even  if  it  is  not  actually  a  work  of  Satan.  Of  all  such  vagaries  the 
First  Epistle  of  Peter  is  the  best  corrective.  Truth  is  here  ad- 
mirably guarded  against  the  error  that  lurks  at  its  root.  The  very 
epistle  that  emphasizes  the  separateness  of  the  Church  from  the 
world,  that  teaches  Christian  people  to  look  down  upon  earthly 
affairs  from  the  vantage  ground  of  heaven,  is  just  the  epistle  that 
inculcates  sober  and  diligent  conduct  in  the  various  relationships 
of  earthly  life.  In  the  effort  at  a  higher  morality,  the  simple, 
humble  virtues  that  even  the  world  appreciates  should  not  be 
neglected ;  piety  should  involve  no  loss  of  common  sense.  Now  as 
always  the  Christian  should  be  ready  to  give  a  reason  for  the  faith 
that  is  in  him;  now  as  always  he  should  be  able  to  refute  the  slanders 
of  the  world;  now  as  always  he  should  commend  his  Christianity  by 
his  good  citizenship.  Only  so  will  the  example  of  Christ  be  fully 
followed.  Jesus  was  in  possession  of  a  transcendent  message;  but 
he  lived  the  life  of  a  normal  man.  The  Christian,  too,  is  a  man 
with  a  divine  mission;  but  like  his  Master  he  must  exercise  his 
mission  in  the  turmoil  of  life.  He  must  not  be  a  spoilsport  at  feasts; 
his  is  no  desert  role  like  John  the  Baptist's.  Christianity  has  a 
mission  from  without;  but  its  mission  is  fulfilled  in  loving  contact 
with  the  world  of  men. 


CHRISTIAN  FORTITUDE  191 

(4)  The  Christian's  Defense. — The  Christians  who  suffered  per- 
secution should  first  of  all,  according  to  Peter,  defend  themselves 
to  the  very  best  of  their  ability.  They  should  do  their  best  to 
remove  dishonor  from  the  name  of  Christ.  They  should  show  the 
baselessness  of  the  accusations  which  are  brought  against  them. 
Then,  if  they  still  suffer,  it  will  be  clearly  suffering  for  Christ's 
sake.  Such  suffering  is  glorious.  It  is  a  test  from  which  faith 
emerges  strong  and  sure,  ch.  1  :  7;  it  is  true  conformity  to  the  ex- 
ample of  Christ.     Chs.  2  :  21-24;  3  :  18;  4  :  1,  13. 

2.     THE  DATE  OF  THE  PERSECUTIONS 

From  the  persecutions  presupposed  in  First  Peter  no  very  certain 
conclusion  can  be  drawn  with  regard  to  the  date  of  the  epistle.  A 
late  date  has  sometimes  been  inferred  from  such  passages  as  I 
Peter  4  :  16.  Christians  were  not  punished  as  Christians,  it  is 
said,  until  the  beginning  of  the  second  century,  and  especially  no 
such  persecution  was  carried  out  in  the  early  period  throughout 
the  whole  empire.     Ch.  5  :  9. 

This  argument  breaks  down  at  a  number  of  points.  In  the  first 
place,  as  has  already  been  observed,  it  is  by  no  means  clear  that 
First  Peter  presupposes  a  persecution  of  the  Christians  simply  as 
Christians.  Apparently  special  charges  of  immorality  were  still  in 
the  foreground,  though  these  charges  were  often  mere  pretexts  in 
order  to  secure  the  punishment  of  members  of  the  hated  sect. 

In  the  second  place,  it  is  not  clear  exactly  when  Christians  first 
began  to  be  punished  as  "Christians"  by  the  Roman  authorities. 
Undoubtedly  the  legal  basis  for  such  persecution  was  present  as 
soon  as  Christianity  began  to  be  regarded  as  separate  from  Judaism. 
Judaism  had  a  legal  status;  Christianity,  strictly  speaking,  had 
none. 

3.     DEPENDENCE  AND  ORIGINALITY 

First  Peter  is  clearly  dependent  upon  a  number  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  and  apparently  also  upon  the  Epistle  of  James.  The 
dependence,  however,  is  by  no  means  slavish;  the  epistle  possesses 
marked  characteristics  of  its  own.  As  compared  with  Paul,  for 
example,  First  Peter  is  somewhat  simpler  both  in  thought  and  in 
expression.  No  mere  imitator,  but  a  genuine  personality,  speaks 
to  us  from  the  noble  simplicity  of  these  pages. 

4.     COMPARISON  WITH  THE  SPEECHES  OF  PETER 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  this  epistle  with  the  early  speeches  of 
Peter  that  are  recorded  in  The  Acts.     Part  of  the  difference — 


192  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

similarities  also  have  been  pointed  out — no  doubt,  was  due  to  the 
difference  in  the  persons  addressed.  In  those  early  speeches, 
Peter  was  preaching  to  unconverted  Jews,  and  had  to  content  him- 
self with  a  few  outstanding  facts.  In  the  epistle,  he  was  addressing 
Christians,  before  whom  he  could  lay  bare  the  deep  things  of  the 
faith.  Nevertheless,  the  passing  years  had  brought  a  change  in 
Peter  himself.  Upon  him  as  upon  everyone  else  the  mighty  in- 
fluence of  Paul  made  itself  felt;  and  even  the  revelation  which  came 
directly  to  him  was  progressive.  The  essence  of  the  gospel  was 
present  from  the  beginning;  but  the  rich  unfolding  of  it  which  appears 
in  First  Peter  was  the  product  of  long  years  spent  in  an  ever- 
widening  service. 

5.     THE  STYLE  OF  THE  EPISTLE 

The  style  of  First  Peter,  though  not  at  all  rhetorical,  like  that  of 
Hebrews,  is  smooth  and  graceful.  It  has  often  been  considered 
strange  that  a  fisherman  of  Galilee  should  have  been  so  proficient 
in  Greek.  But  probably  we  have  an  exaggerated  notion  of  the 
poverty  and  roughness  of  the  first  disciples  of  Jesus.  Undoubtedly 
they  had  not  enjoyed  a  rabbinical  education;  in  the  technical 
Jewish  sense  they  were  "unlearned  and  ignorant  men."  Acts  4  :  13. 
Nevertheless,  they  clearly  did  not  belong  at  all  to  the  lowest  of 
the  population;  Peter  in  particular  seems  to  have  been  possessed 
of  considerable  property.  Furthermore,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  Greek  culture  in  the  first  century  was  making  itself  felt  very 
extensively  in  Galilee.  No  doubt  Peter  could  use  Greek  even 
before  he  left  Galilee,  and  in  the  course  of  his  later  life  his  linguistic 
attainments  must  have  been  very  greatly  improved.  It  is  by  no 
means  impossible  that  he  wrote  First  Peter  entirely  without  as- 
sistance. 

6.     SILVANUS 

In  order,  however,  to  account  for  the  linguistic  excellence  of  this 
epistle,  and  in  particular  for  the  striking  difference  between  it  and 
Second  Peter,  a  rather  attractive  hypothesis  has  been  proposed. 
In  I  Peter  5  :  12,  Peter  says:  "By  Silvanus,  our  faithful  brother,  as 
I  account  him,  I  have  written  unto  you  briefly."  Undoubtedly 
these  words  may  designate  Silvanus  merely  as  the  messenger  who 
carried  the  letter  to  its  destination.  Compare  Acts  15  :  23.  It  is 
also  possible,  however,  that  Peter  meant  to  say  that  Silvanus  had 
written  the  letter  under  his  direction.  In  that  case  the  thought 
would  be  due  altogether  to  Peter;  but  the  form,  to  some  extent 


CHRISTIAN  FORTITUDE  193 

at  least,  would  be  the  work  of  Silvanus.  The  hypothesis,  of  course, 
is  only  plausible,  not  necessary.  There  are  other  ways  of  accounting 
for  the  peculiarities  of  the  epistle. 

In  all  probability,  the  Silvanus  of  First  Peter  is  the  same  as  the 
Silvanus  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  and  the  Silas  of  The  Acts.  If  so, 
his  association  with  Peter  is  altogether  natural ;  he  was  originally 
a  member  of  the  Jerusalem  church.  If,  in  accordance  with  the 
hypothesis  which  has  just  been  mentioned,  Silvanus  was  really 
concerned  in  the  composition  of  the  epistle,  the  choice  of  such  a 
man  for  the  task  was,  as  has  been  pointed  out  by  the  chief  advocate 
of  the  hypothesis,  exceedingly  wise.  Silvanus,  who  had  been  a 
companion  of  Paul  and  his  associate  in  founding  many  of  the 
churches  of  Asia  Minor,  would  be  just  the  man  who  could  find  the 
right  tone  in  writing  to  the  churches  to  which  the  epistle  is  ad- 
dressed. 

7.     MARK 

The  appearance  of  Mark  in  I  Peter  5  :  13  confirms  the  strong 
tradition  which  makes  Mark  a  disciple  of  Peter  and  associates  him 
with  Peter  in  the  production  of  the  Second  Gospel.  The  only  two 
individuals  whom  Peter  mentions  in  his  First  Epistle  were  both 
natives  of  Jerusalem,  and  both,  during  part  of  their  lives,  companions 
of  Paul.  The  unity  of  the  apostolic  Church  was  preserved  not  only 
by  a  unity  of  spirit,  but  also  by  the  changing  associations  of  Christian 
workers. 

8.     FORTITUDE  IN  THE  MODERN  CHURCH 

The  First  Epistle  of  Peter  has  a  varied  message  to  the  Church  of 
to-day.  Even  in  its  exhortations  to  bravery  and  steadfastness  it  is 
very  much  needed.  We  are  not  subject  to  persecution  by  the  state, 
but  still  there  are  a  thousand  circumstances  of  life  in  which  we  need 
to  humble  ourselves  under  the  mighty  hand  of  God,  casting  all  our 
anxiety  upon  him,  because  he  careth  for  us.     Ch.  5  :  6,  7. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  267,  275-282.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Warfield  (supple- 
mented), article  on  "Peter."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and 
Its  Writers,"  pp.  130-136.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary 
for  English  Readers,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  385-436:  Mason,  "The  First  Epistle 
of  St.  Peter."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  ii, 
pp.  134-194.  The  last-named  work  is  intended  primarily  for  those  who 
have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 
Sen.  t.  m.  3. 


LESSON  XXXV 


THE     CHRISTIAN'S     ATTITUDE     TOWARD     ERROR     AND 
IMMORALITY 

The  Second  Epistle  of  Peter  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude 


1.     AUTHENTICITY 

The  Second  Epistle  of  Peter  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude  are  among 
the  least  known  and  most  seriously  questioned  parts  of  the  New- 
Testament.  Even  in  ancient  times  their  authenticity  was  disputed; 
in  the  third  and  fourth  centuries  there  were  some  at  least  who 
desired  to  exclude  them  from  the  New  Testament.  These  ancient 
doubts  have  been  continued  in  the  modern  Church.  By  very  many 
scholars  of  the  present  day,  Second  Peter  and  Jude  are  assigned  to 
second-century  writers  who  falsely  assumed  the  names  of  an  apostle 
and  of  a  brother  of  the  Lord. 

Against  such  views  as  these,  a  number  of  arguments  might  be 
employed.  But  the  strongest  argument  of  all  is  provided  by  the 
self-witness  of  the  epistles  themselves.  Second  Peter,  in  particular, 
not  only  lays  claim  to  apostolic  authorship  in  the  address,  but 
is  written  throughout  in  the  name  of  an  apostle.  Either  it  was  really 
written  by  an  apostle  or  else  it  was  a  deliberate  fraud.  The  latter 
alternative  is  excluded  by  the  epistle  itself.  Second  Peter  does  not 
look  at  all  like  a  pseudonymous  work,  but  is  a  weighty  bit  of 
writing,  full  of  the  sincerest  moral  earnestness.  Both  Second 
Peter  and  Jude  ring  true,  with  the  genuine  apostolic  note. 

2.     SECOND  PETER  AND  FIRST  PETER 

Resemblances  have  often  been  pointed  out  among  all  three 
divisions  of  the  New  Testament  material  attributed  to  Peter. 
Second  Peter  has  been  shown  to  resemble  not  only  First  Peter,  but 
also  the  speeches  of  Peter  as  they  are  reported  in  The  Acts.  Such 
similarities  of  course  point  to  a  common  authorship.  It  cannot  be 
denied,  however,  that  differences  stand  side  by  side  with  the 
similarities.  In  the  comparison  of  the  epistles  with  the  speeches, 
such  differences  are  of  course  not  surprising.     The  total  difference 

194 


ATTITUDE  TOWARD  ERROR  AND  IMMORALITY     195 

of  subject  and  the  wide  interval  of  time  provide  an  amply  sufficient 
explanation.  But  how  is  it  with  the  difference  between  Second 
Peter  and  First  Peter? 

(1)  Difference  of  Purpose  and  Subject. — In  the  first  place,  the 
difference  may  be  partly  explained  by  the  difference  of  purpose  and 
subject.  First  Peter  is  a  presentation  of  the  glories  of  the  faith  in 
order  to  encourage  Christians  under  trial  and  make  them  feel  their 
separateness  from  the  world;  Second  Peter  is  a  solemn  warning 
against  dangerous  perverters  of  the  life  of  the  Church. 

(2)  Difference  of  Time. — In  the  second  place,  a  considerable  in- 
terval of  time  may  separate  the  two  epistles.  Here  we  find  ourselves 
on  uncertain  ground.  On  the  whole  it  is  perhaps  better  to  put  the 
epistles  near  together  at  the  close  of  Peter's  life. 

(3)  Work  of  Silvanus. — In  the  third  place,  recourse  may  be  had 
to  the  hypothesis,  mentioned  in  the  last  lesson,  which  attributes  a 
considerable  share  in  the  composition  of  First  Peter  to  Silvanus. 

(4)  Conclusion.— Finally,  there  may  be  still  further  possibilities 
of  explanation  which  cannot  now  be  detected.  The  differences  of 
style  and  of  thought  between  the  two  epistles  of  Peter  are  far  from 
sufficient  to  show  diversity  of  authorship,  and  it  must  be  remembered 
that  similarities  are  to  be  balanced  against  the  differences. 

3.  VALUE  OF  SECOND  PETER  AND  JUDE 

Although  Second  Peter  and  Jude  are  not  so  familiar  as  most  of 
the  New  Testament,  yet  even  these  two  brief  epistles  have  entered 
deep  into  the  mind  and  heart  of  the  Church. 

(1)  Expressive  Phrases. — Even  the  inimitably  expressive  phrases 
and  sentences  that  have  been  derived  from  the  epistles  have  pro- 
duced no  small  enrichment  of  Christian  life.  The  "exceeding  great 
and  precious  promises,"  and  the  "partakers  of  the  divine  nature" 
of  II  Peter  1  : 4,  the  chain  of  virtues  in  vs.  5-7,  the  "make  your 
calling  and  election  sure"  of  v.  10,  the  "sure  word  of  prophecy"  of 
v.  19,  the  description  of  inspired  prophecy  in  vs.  20,  21 — "no 
prophecy  of  the  scripture  is  of  any  private  interpretation.  For 
the  prophecy  came  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man:  but  holy 
men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost"— the 
"vexed  his  righteous  soul"  of  ch.  2  :  8,  the  "railing  accusation"  of 
v.  11;  Jude  9,  the  "stir  up  your  pure  minds  by  way  of  remem- 
brance" of  II  Peter  3  :  1,  the  "not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but 
that  all  should  come  to  repentance"  of  v.  9,  the  "faith  which  was 
once  delivered  unto  the  saints"  of  Jude  3,  the  magnificent  dox- 


196  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

ology  of  vs.  24,  25 — a  review  of  these  passages  as  they  appear  in 
the  King  James  Version  will  bring  some  realization  of  the  profound 
influence  which  even  the  most  obscure  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment have  exerted  both  upon  the  English  language  and  upon  the 
character  of  Christian  men. 

The  influence  of  Second  Peter  and  Jude,  however,  is  not  merely 
the  influence  of  isolated  phrases.  The  epistles  as  a  whole  have  a 
distinctive  message  for  the  Church.  That  message  is  twofold. 
It  embraces  in  the  first  place  an  emphasis  upon  authority,  and  in  the 
second  place  an  insistence  upon  holiness. 

(2)  The  Emphasis  Upon  Authority. — The  adversaries  who  are 
combated  in  Second  Peter  and  Jude  were  impatient  of  restraint. 
Apparently  they  distinguished  themselves,  as  possessing  the  Spirit, 
from  the  ordinary  Christians,  as  being  merely  "natural."  Jude 
5,  19;  II  Peter  2  :  12.  They  appealed  to  their  own  deeper  insight, 
instead  of  listening  to  what  apostles  and  prophets  had  to  say.  In 
reply,  Peter  and  Jude  insisted  upon  the  authority  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment prophets,  and  upon  the  authority  of  the  apostles,  which  was 
ultimately  the  authority  of  Christ.     See  especially  II  Peter  3  :  2. 

A  similar  insistence  upon  authority  is  greatly  needed  to-day. 
Again  men  are  inclined  to  appeal  to  an  inward  light  as  justifying 
freedom  from  ancient  restraints;  the  Christian  consciousness  is 
being  exalted  above  the  Bible.  At  such  a  time,  renewed  attention 
to  Second  Peter  and  Jude  would  be  salutary.  False  notions  are 
rife  to-day  with  regard  to  apostolic  authority.  They  can  be  cor- 
rected by  our  epistles.  Peter  as  well  as  Paul  exerts  his  authority 
not  in  an  ofhcial  or  coldly  ecclesiastical  way,  but  with  an  inimitable 
brotherliness.  The  authority  of  the  apostles  is  the  authority  of 
good  news.     Subjection  to  such  authority  is  perfect  freedom. 

The  authority  which  Peter  and  Jude  urge  upon  their  readers  is  a 
double  authority — in  the  first  place  the  authority  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  in  the  second  place  the  authority  of  Christ  exerted 
through  the  apostles.  For  us,  however,  the  two  become  one.  The 
apostles,  like  the  Old  Testament  prophets,  speak  to  us  only  through 
the  Bible.  We  need  to  learn  the  lesson.  A  return  to  the  Bible  is 
the  deepest  need  of  the  modern  Church.  It  would  mean  a  return 
to  God. 

(3)  Insistence  Upon  Holiness. — The  second  characteristic  of 
Second  Peter  and  Jude  is  the  insistence  upon  holiness.  Religion 
is  by  no  means  always  connected  with  goodness.  In  the  Greco- 
Roman  world,  the  two  were  often  entirely  separate.     Many  pagan 


ATTITUDE  TOWARD  ERROR  AND  IMMORALITY      197 

cults  contained  no  ethical  element  whatever.  The  danger  was  there- 
fore very  great  that  Christianity  might  be  treated  in  the  same  way. 
The  early  Christians  needed  to  be  admonished  ever  and  again  that 
their  God  was  a  God  of  righteousness,  that  no  unclean  thing  could 
stand  in  his  presence. 

Insistence  upon  holiness  is  in  itself  no  peculiarity  of  Second  Peter 
and  Jude.  It  runs  all  through  the  New  Testament.  But  in  these 
epistles  it  is  directed  more  definitely  perhaps  than  anywhere  else 
against  the  opposite  error.  The  opponents  of  Peter  and  Jude  did 
not  merely  drift  into  immorality;  they  defended  it  on  theoretical 
grounds.  They  were  making  a  deliberate  effort  to  reduce  Chris- 
tianity to  the  level  of  a  non-ethical  religion.  Such  theoretical  de- 
fense of  immorality  appears,  indeed,  in  a  number  of  places  in  the 
apostolic  Church.  A  certain  party  in  Corinth,  for  example,  made 
a  wrong  use  of  Christian  freedom.  But  what  is  more  or  less  in- 
cidental in  First  Corinthians  forms  the  main  subject  of  Second  Peter 
and  Jude.  Christianity  is  here  insisting  upon  its  thoroughly  ethical 
character. 

At  first  sight  the  message  might  seem  obsolete  to-day.  We 
always  associate  religion  with  morality;  we  can  hardly  understand 
how  the  two  ever  could  have  been  separated.  It  is  to  be  feared,  how- 
ever, that  the  danger  is  not  altogether  past.  In  our  thoughts  we 
preserve  the  ethical  character  of  Christianity.  But  how  is  it  with 
our  lives?  How  is  it  with  our  religious  observances?  Are  we  not 
constantly  in  danger  of  making  religion  a  mere  cult,  a  mere  emotional 
excitement,  a  mere  means  of  gaining  earthly  or  heavenly  advan- 
tages, a  mere  effort  to  bribe  God  by  our  worship?  The  danger  is 
always  with  us.  We  need  always  to  remind  ourselves  that  Christian 
faith  must  work  itself  out  in  holy  living. 

Peter  in  his  second  epistle  has  provided  us  with  one  important 
means  to  that  end.  It  is  the  thought  of  Christ's  coming.  There  can 
be  no  laxness  in  moral  effort  if  we  remember  the  judgment  seat  of 
Christ. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
267-270,  282-285.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Warfield  (supple- 
mented), article  on  "Jude."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament  and 
Its  Writers,"  pp.  137-143.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament  Commentary 
for  English  Readers,"  vol.  Ill,  pp.  437-463,  505-519:  Plummer,  "The 
Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter"  and  "The  Epistle  of  St.  Jude."  Zahn, 
"Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol,  ii,  pp.  194-293.  The 
last-named  work  is  intended  primarily  for  those  who  have  some  knowl- 
edge of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON  XXXVI 

THE  LIFE  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  GOD 

The  Epistles  of  John 


1.  AUTHORSHIP  OF  THE  FIRST  EPISTLE 

The  First  Epistle  of  John  does  not  contain  the  name  of  its  author. 
According  to  tradition,  however,  it  was  written  by  the  apostle  John, 
and  tradition  is  here  supported  by  the  characteristics  of  the  epistle 
itself.  The  author  of  the  epistle  was  evidently  the  same  as  the 
author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  The  marked  similarity  in  style  can 
be  explained  in  no  other  way.  Even  the  careless  reader  observes 
that  the  style  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  very  peculiar.  Short  sen- 
tences are  joined  to  one  another  with  the  utmost  simplicity;  the 
vocabulary  is  limited,  but  contains  expressions  of  extraordinary 
richness;  the  total  effect  is  singularly  powerful.  These  same 
characteristics,  though  they  are  so  peculiar,  appear  also  in  the 
epistle.  There  is  the  same  simplicity  of  sentence  structure,  the 
same  use  of  such  terms  as  "life"  and  "light"  and  "love,"  the  same 
indescribable  spirit  and  tone.  Yet  the  epistle  is  no  slavish  imita- 
tion of  the  Gospel — differences  stand  side  by  side  with  the  similar- 
ities. These  two  works  are  evidently  related,  not  as  model  and 
copy,  but  as  living  productions  of  the  same  remarkable  personality. 

2.     TESTIMONY  OF  AN  EYEWITNESS 

As  in  the  Gospel,  so  also  in  the  epistle  the  author  presents  himself 
clearly  as  an  eyewitness  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  I  John  1  :  1-3;  4  :  14; 
as  in  the  Gospel  he  lays  stress  upon  simple  testimony.  Even  those 
things  which  have  just  been  noticed  as  characteristic  of  his  style  are 
connected  ultimately  with  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  In  both  Gospel 
and  epistle,  the  beloved  disciple  has  reproduced  what  he  heard  in 
Galilee  and  in  Judea,  though  in  both  he  has  made  the  memory  a 
living,  spiritual  fact. 

3.     DESTINATION  AND  DATE 

The  First  Epistle  of  John  is  perhaps  scarcely  to  be  called  an  epistle 
at  all.     Practically  all  the  characteristics  of  a  letter  are  missing. 

198 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  GOD  199 

There  is  no  address;  there  is  no  greeting  at  the  close;  there  are  no 
personal  details.  The  readers  are  indeed  referred  to  in  the  second 
person;  but  preachers  as  well  as  letter-writers  say,  "you."  First 
John  is  a  sort  of  general  address  written  probably  to  some  extended 
group  of  churches. 

These  churches  are  probably  to  be  sought  in  Asia  Minor. 
Throughout  the  epistle  the  readers  are  addressed  in  a  fatherly  tone. 
See,  for  example,  ch.  2:1.  Evidently  the  writer  was  well  known 
as  a  sort  of  patriarch  throughout  an  extended  region.  Such  con- 
ditions prevailed  in  Asia  Minor  after  the  apostle  John  had  begun  to 
reside  at  Ephesus.  Trustworthy  tradition  as  well  as  the  New 
Testament  informs  us  of  a  period  in  the  apostle's  life  when  he  had 
outlived  all  or  most  of  the  other  apostles  and  was  revered  as  the 
head  of  the  Asian  church.  At  some  time  within  this  period — 
probably  nearer  the  end  than  the  beginning — the  First  Epistle  of 
John  was  written. 

4.     THE  FALSE  TEACHERS 

The  form  of  error  against  which  the  epistle  is  directed  becomes 
clearest,  perhaps  in  ch.  4  :  2,  3.  The  false  teachers  had  denied  that 
Jesus  Christ  was  come  in  the  flesh.  This  may  be  interpreted  in 
several  different  ways. 

(1)  Docetism.— In  the  first  place,  John  may  mean  that  the 
opponents  simply  denied  the  reality  of  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus. 
Such  a  form  of  error  is  by  no  means  unknown  in  the  history  of  the 
Church.  It  is  called  "Docetism."  According  to  Docetism  the 
Son  of  God  did  not  really  live  a  human  life — with  human  sufferings 
and  a  human  death — but  only  appeared  to  do  so. 

(2)  Cerinthus. — In  the  second  place,  the  meaning  of  the  passage 
may  be  that  the  opponents  denied  the  unity  of  the  person  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Compare  ch.  2  :  22.  Some  persons  in  the  early  Church 
supposed  that  there  were  two  separate  persons  in  the  figure  that  is 
described  in  the  Gospels.  A  heavenly  being,  the  Christ,  it  was 
thought,  united  himself  with  the  man  Jesus  at  the  time  when  the 
dove  descended  after  the  baptism.  Matt.  3  :  16,  17.  Such  was 
the  view  of  Cerinthus,  who  is  declared  by  tradition  to  have  been  an 
opponent  of  the  apostle  John  at  Ephesus.  It  has  been  suggested, 
therefore,  that  it  was  actually  Cerinthus,  with  his  disciples,  who  is 
combated  in  the  First  Epistle  of  John. 

(3)  Denial  of  the  Incarnation. — Both  Cerinthus  and  the  Docetists 
denied  the  reality  of  the  incarnation — both  denied  that  the  Son  of 


200  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

God  actually  assumed  a  human  nature  and  lived  a  complete  human 
life.  According  to  Cerinthus  and  others  like  him,  the  Christ  stood 
only  in  somewhat  loose  relation  to  the  man  Jesus.  He  was  united 
with  him  only  late  in  life,  he  left  him  before  the  crucifixion.  On 
this  view,  it  was  not  the  Christ  who  lay  in  the  manger  at  Bethlehem, 
it  was  not  the  Christ  who  suffered  on  the  cross.  Cerinthus,  like  the 
Docetists,  kept  the  Son  of  God  out  of  any  close  relation  to  the  world 
and  to  us. 

(4)  John's  Reply. — Against  some  such  view  as  one  of  these,  John 
was  concerned  to  establish  the  reality  of  the  incarnation — the  truth 
that  "the  Word  became  flesh."  In  the  Gospel,  that  truth  underlies 
the  whole  of  the  narrative;  in  the  First  Epistle  it  is  directly  defended 
against  the  opposing  error.  It  is  defended  first  of  all  by  an 
appeal  to  what  the  writer  had  seen  and  heard.  "We  knew  Jesus 
in  Palestine,"  says  John  in  effect,  "and  we  can  testify  that  Jesus 
himself  was  none  other  than  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  I  John, 
1  :  1-4. 

(5)  John,  the  Opponents,  and  Cerinthus. — The  false  teachers  who 
are  combated  in  the  epistle  had  apparently  withdrawn  from  the 
Church  and  formed  a  separate  sect.  I  John  2:19.  Their  separate- 
ness  of  mind  and  heart  and  life  had  found  expression  in  open  schism. 
Whether  they  are  to  be  identified  with  disciples  of  Cerinthus  is  at 
least  doubtful.  False  speculation  about  the  person  of  Christ  no 
doubt  assumed  many  forms  in  the  closing  years  of  the  first  century. 

5.  CONNECTION  BETWEEN  THE  SECOND  AND  THE  THIRD 

EPISTLE 

In  III  John  9,  the  apostle  tells  Gaius  that  he  had  written  "some- 
what unto  the  church."  This  letter  to  the  church  may  have  been 
written  at  some  previous  time.  It  is  also  possible,  however,  that  it 
was  written  together  with  the  letter  to  Gaius.  The  Greek  word  for 
"I  wrote"  admits  of  that  interpretation.  If  that  interpretation  be 
correct,  then  John  perhaps  means  to  say  that  although  he  has  written 
a  letter  to  the  church  he  could  not  in  that  letter  urge  the  hospitable 
reception  of  the  missionaries.  For  the  present,  the  influence  of 
Diotrephes  was  too  strong.  The  letter  to  the  church  had  to  be 
concerned  with  other  matters. 

If  this  view  of  the  letter  mentioned  in  III  John  9  be  adopted,  then 
the  Second  Epistle  of  John  corresponds  to  the  description.  The 
Second  Epistle  is  addressed  to  a  church,  and  it  is  written  with  some 
reserve.     If  "certain"  of  the  children  of  "the  elect  lady"   were 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  GOD  201 

walking  in  truth,  II  John  4,  the  inference  is  that  others  were  con- 
ducting themselves  very  differently.  Evidently  there  was  danger 
of  false  teaching  among  the  readers.  Hospitality  to  men  like 
Demetrius  and  his  companions  could  hardly  be  expected  of  such  a 
church.  If  hospitality  should  be  practiced,  it  was  only  too  likely 
to  be  hospitality  to  men  of  a  very  different  stamp.     Vs.  10,  11. 

Possibly,  therefore,  the  Second  Epistle  of  John  is  actually  the 
letter  that  is  referred  to  in  III  John  9,  a  letter  to  the  church  of  which 
Gaius  was  a  member.  This  hypothesis  is  supported  by  the  striking 
formal  similarity  of  the  two  letters.  They  are  of  almost  exactly 
the  same  length;  the  openings  and  especially  the  conclusions, 
II  John  12,  13;  III  John  13,  14,  are  couched  in  almost  exactly  the 
same  terms.  They  look  very  much  like  twin  epistles,  written  on 
two  sheets  of  papyrus  of  the  same  size. 

Of  course  the  hypothesis  is  by  no  means  certain.  Perhaps  the 
letter  referred  to  in  III  John  9  was  a  previous  letter  bespeaking 
hospitality,  which  had  failed  of  its  effect.  When  the  apostle  saw, 
from  the  answer  or  lack  of  answer  to  the  previous  letter,  that  the 
church  was  ill  disposed,  he  had  recourse  to  an  individual  member  of 
it.  Even  in  this  case,  however,  it  remains  probable  that  our  two 
epistles  were  written  at  about  the  same  time. 

6.     VALUE  OF  THE  SHORTER  EPISTLES 

These  last  two  epistles  of  John  do  not  deserve  the  neglect  which 
they  have  sometimes  suffered.  Despite  their  brevity — they  are 
the  shortest  books  of  the  New  Testament — they  are  instructive  in 
a  number  ol  ways. 

(1)  Historical. — It  is  exceedingly  interesting,  for  example,  to 
compare  them  with  the  private  letters  of  the  same  period  which 
have  recently  been  discovered  in  Egypt — see  Lesson  III,  Teacher's 
Manual,  in  this  course.  In  form,  the  opening  of  the  Third  Epistle 
is  very  much  in  the  manner  of  the  papyrus  letters.  Compare,  for 
example,  with  III  John  1-4  the  following  opening  of  a  letter  of  the 
second  century  after  Christ:  "Apion  to  Epimachus  his  father  and 
lord  heartiest  greetings.  First  of  all  I  pray  that  you  are  in  health 
and  continually  prosper  and  fare  well  with  my  sister  and  daughter 
and  my  brother.  I  thank  the  lord  Serapis.  ..."  (The  transla- 
tion is  that  of  Professor  Milligan.  See  p.  20  of  Teacher's  Man- 
ual, Part  I,  of  this  course.)  The  differences,  however,  are  even 
more  instructive  than  the  resemblances.  What  was  said  in  Lesson 
I  about  the  epistles  of  Paul  applies  in  full  measure  to  the  epistles 


202  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

of  John.     Even  the  epistolary  forms  are  here  modified  so  as   to 
be  the  vehicle  of  a  new  message  and  a  new  spirit. 

Furthermore,  the  two  epistles,  especially  Third  John,  cast  a  flood 
of  light  upon  the  internal  development  of  the  Church.  In  one 
respect  indeed  the  historical  significance  of  the  Third  Epistle  has 
sometimes  been  exaggerated.  It  is  not  true  that  we  have  here  the 
emergence  of  the  monarchical  episcopate — that  is,  the  preeminence 
of  one  presbyter,  called  a  "bishop,"  over  his  brother  presbyters. 
Diotrephes  does  not  appear  clearly  as  a  bishop.  At  about  A.  D. 
110  in  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  the  episcopate  is  very  prominent;  but 
Third  John  belongs  to  an  earlier  period. 

Nevertheless,  this  concrete  picture  of  the  internal  affairs  of  a  late 
first-century  church  is  absolutely  unique.  The  period  is  very 
obscure;  these  few  brief  lines  illumine  it  more  than  pages  of  narra- 
tive. The  traveling  preachers  of  Third  John  are  particularly  in- 
teresting. Similar  missionaries  appear  also  in  the  "Didache,"  a 
sort  of  church  manual  which  may  probably  be  dated  in  the  early 
part  of  the  second  century.  In  that  later  period,  however,  care 
had  to  be  taken  lest  the  hospitality  of  the  churches  should  be 
abused.  "But  let  every  apostle,"  says  the  writer — the  word 
"apostle"  is  used  in  a  very  broad  sense  to  designate  wandering 
preachers — "who  comes  to  you  be  received  as  the  Lord.  He  shall 
remain,  however,  no  more  than  one  day,  or  if  necessary  two.  If 
he  remains  three  days  he  is  a  false  prophet."  Such  precautions,  we 
may  be  sure,  were  not  needed  in  the  case  of  Demetrius  and  his  com- 
panions. 

(2)  Practical. — Despite  its  individual  address  and  private  charac- 
ter, the  Third  Epistle  of  John  is  not  an  ordinary  private  letter. 
Like  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  it  has  a  message  for  the 
entire  Church.  The  devout  reader  rises  from  the  perusal  of  it  with 
a  more  steadfast  devotion  to  the  truth  and  a  warmer  glow  of 
Christian  love. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp. 
272-274,  294-308."  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  (supple- 
mented), article  on  "John,  Epistles  of."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testa- 
ment and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  144-149.  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament 
Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  467-502:  Sinclair, 
"The  Epistles  of  St.  John."  Westcott,  "The  Epistles  of  St.  John." 
Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  355-384. 
The  two  last-named  works  are  intended  primarily  for  those  who  have 
some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON   XXXVII 
THE  MESSAGES  OF  THE  LIVING  CHRIST 

The  Book  of  Revelation  (First  Lesson) 


1.  THE  APOCALYPSE  AND  THE  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN 

In  the  Student's  Text  Book  it  was  maintained  that  the  Apocalypse 
was  written  by  John  the  son  of  Zebedee.  The  strongest  objection 
to  this  view  is  to  be  found  in  the  striking  difference  of  language  and 
style  which  exists  between  the  Apocalypse  on  the  one  side  and  the 
Gospel  and  Epistles  of  John  on  the  other.  The  style  of  the 
Apocalypse  is  extraordinarily  rough;  in  it  the  most  elementary  laws 
of  Greek  grammar  are  sometimes  disregarded.  Such  peculiarities 
appear  scarcely  at  all  in  the  Gospel;  the  language  of  the. Gospel, 
though  simple,  is  perfectly  grammatical. 

This  observation  has  led  many  scholars  to  decide  that  the  Gospel 
and  the  Apocalypse  never  could  have  been  written  by  the  same 
person;  the  argument,  indeed,  was  advanced  as  early  as  the  third 
century  by  Dionysius  of  Alexandria.  Those  who  thus  deny  the 
unity  of  authorship  do  not  all  reject  either  one  book  or  the  other 
as  authoritative;  some  suppose  that  the  John  whose  name  appears 
in  the  Apocalypse,  though  not  the  same  as  John  the  son  of 
Zebedee,  was  a  genuine  prophet. 

The  evidence,  however,  for  attributing  all  the  Johannine  books  to 
the  son  of  Zebedee  is  exceedingly  strong.  If  the  Apocalypse  is  to  be 
attributed  to  some  one  else,  tradition  is  very  seriously  at  fault,  and 
it  is  also  very  difficult  to  see  how  another  John  could  have  introduced 
himself  to  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  in  the  way  that  the  author 
does  at  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  book  without  distinguishing 
himself  from  the  greater  man  of  the  same  name  who  was  residing 
at  Ephesus  at  the  very  same  time.  The  Apocalypse  must  there- 
fore be  assigned  to  the  son  of  Zebedee  unless  there  is  absolutely 
unimpeachable  evidence  to  the  contrary. 

Such  evidence  is  not  really  forthcoming.  The  difference  of  style 
between  the  Apocalypse  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  capable  of 
explanation. 

(1)  Possible  Difference  of  Date. — In  the  first  place,  it  might  be 

203 


204  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

explained  by  a  wide  difference  of  date.  If  the  Apocalypse  was 
written  at  about  A.  D.  68,  then  an  interval  of  some  twenty-five, 
years  or  more  separates  it  from  the  Gospel.  Such  an  interval 
would  allow  plenty  of  time  for  the  style  of  the  author  to  change. 
When  the  Galilean  fisherman  first  left  his  home  in  Palestine,  his 
command  of  the  Greek  language  might  conceivably  be  slight; 
whereas  after  a  long  residence  in  Asia  Minor,  as  leader  of  a  group  of 
Greek-speaking  churches,  the  roughness  of  his  style  would  be  re- 
moved. Hence  the  un-Greek,  strongly  Hebraistic  usages  of  the 
Apocalypse  would  in  the  Gospel  naturally  give  place  to  a  correct, 
though  simple  style. 

This  hypothesis,  however,  is  beset  with  serious  difficulties.  It 
is  difficult  to  suppose  that  the  Apocalypse  was  written  before  the 
closing  decade  of  the  first  century.  Some  passages,  it  is  true,  have 
been  strongly  urged  in  favor  of  the  early  date.  Particularly  the 
reference  to  the  seven  kings  in  Rev.  17  :  10  has  been  thought  by 
many  excellent  scholars  to  be  decisive.  The  reference  to  the  seven 
hills  in  the  preceding  verse  seems  to  show  that  the  "beast"  repre- 
sents Rome;  the  seven  kings  therefore  naturally  represent  Roman 
emperors.  The  fifth  emperor,  beginning  with  Augustus,  was  Nero. 
If  at  the  time  when  the  book  was  written  five  were  fallen,  one  was 
and  the  other  was  not  yet  come,  v.  10,  the  book  must  apparently 
have  been  written  under  Nero's  successor.  His  successor,  Galba, 
reigned  only  a  few  months:  the  book  was  therefore  written  in  A.  D. 
68  or  69.  Or  if  the  very  brief  reigns  of  Galba,  Otho  and  Vitellius 
be  not  counted,  then  the  book  was  written  between  A.  D.  69  and 
79,  during  the  reign  of  Vespasian. 

The  passage  remains,  however,  so  obscure  that  it  is  very  doubtful 
whether  any  one  interpretation  of  it  should  be  allowed  to  over- 
balance the  evidence  for  the  later  date.  Such  evidence  is  abundant. 
Most  weighty  of  all,  perhaps,  is  the  strong  tradition  which  places 
the  Apocalypse  in  the  closing  years  of  Domitian.  It  is  hard  to 
believe  that  that  tradition  is  seriously  at  fault.  The  condition  of 
the  Church,  moreover,  as  it  is  presupposed  in  the  book,  is  more 
naturally  to  be  sought  at  A.  D.  95  than  twenty-five  years  earlier. 
The  persecution,  for  example,  which  the  writer  describes,  seems  far 
more  like  the  persecution  under  Domitian  than  it  is  like  the  outbreak 
which  was  occasioned  by  the  cruelty  of  Nero. 

(2)  The  Difference  of  Subject. — If  the  later  date  be  accepted, 
then  the  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse  were  written  in  the  same 
period  of  the  apostle's  life,  and  the  difference  of  style  cannot  be 


THE  MESSAGES  OF  THE  LIVING  CHRIST  205 

explained  by  a  difference  of  date.  Another  explanation,  however, 
is  sufficient.  The  difference  between  the  two  books  may  be  ex- 
plained by  the  total  difference  of  subject.  The  Gospel  is  a  nar- 
rative of  Jesus'  life,  written  with  abundant  opportunity  for  reflec- 
tion; the  Apocalypse  is  a  record  of  wonderful  visions,  where  stylistic 
nicety  would  have  marred  the  immediateness  of  the  revelation. 
The  very  roughness  of  the  Apocalypse  is  valuable  as  expressing  the 
character  of  the  book.  In  the  Gospel,  John  brought  to  bear  all  his 
power  of  reflection  and  of  expression;  in  the  Apocalypse,  he  wrote 
in  haste  under  the  overpowering  influence  of  a  transcendent 
experience. 

The  grammatical  irregularities  of  the  Apocalypse,  moreover,  often 
create  the  impression  that  they  are  intentional.  They  belonged, 
apparently,  to  an  apocalyptic  style  which  to  a  certain  extent  had 
already  been  formed;  they  were  felt  to  be  suited  to  the  peculiar 
character  of  the  work. 

Finally,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  side  by  side  with  the 
differences  of  style  there  are  some  remarkable  similarities.  The 
underlying  unity  of  thought  and  expression  points  to  unity  of 
authorship. 

2.  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  APOCALYPSE 

(1)  A  Record  of  Visions. — In  what  has  just  been  said,  the  dominant 
peculiarity  of  the  Apocalypse  has  already  been  indicated.  The 
Apocalypse  is  no  careful  literary  composition,  pieced  together  from 
previous  works  of  a  similar  character.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  a 
record  of  genuine  revelations.  Before  writing,  the  seer  was  "in 
the  Spirit." 

(2)  Influence  of  the  Old  Testament. — Nevertheless,  although  the 
Apocalypse  is  a  record  of  visions,  and  was  written  consciously  under 
the  impulsion  of  the  Spirit,  it  is  by  no  means  uninfluenced  by  previous 
works.  To  a  degree  that  is  perhaps  not  paralleled  by  any  other 
New  Testament  book,  the  Apocalypse  is  suffused  with  the  language 
and  with  the  imagery  of  the  Old  Testament.  Though  there  is  not  a 
single  formal  quotation,  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  have  in- 
fluenced almost  every  sentence  of  the  book.  Particularly  the  books 
of  Ezekiel  and  Daniel,  which,  like  the  Apocalypse,  are  composed 
largely  of  the  records  of  visions,  have  supplied  much  of  the  imagery 
of  the  New  Testament  work. 

This  wide-spread  influence  of  the  Old  Testament  upon  the 
Apocalpyse  is  by  no  means  surprising.     The  Apocalypse  is  based 


206  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

upon  direct  revelation,  but  direct  revelation  is  not  necessarily  out 
of  relation  to  everything  else.  On  the  contrary,  it  uses  the  language 
which  its  recipients  can  understand;  and  part  of  the  language  of  the 
apostle  John  was  the  phraseology  and  imagery  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. 

It  has  already  been  hinted  that  works  very  similar  in  form  to  the 
Apocalypse  are  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament.  This  apocalyptic 
form  was  continued  in  a  number  of  Jewish  works  written  after  the 
conclusion  of  the  Old  Testament  canon.  Superficially  these  works 
bear  considerable  resemblance  to  the  New  Testament  Apocalypse; 
but  closer  examination  reveals  profound  differences.  The  Jewish 
apocalypses  appeared  under  assumed  names — the  most  important 
of  them  under  the  name  of  Enoch — while  John  is  so  firmly  con- 
vinced of  having  received  genuine  revelation  that  he  requires  no 
such  spurious  authority  for  his  work.  The  similarity  between 
our  Apocalypse  and  its  extra-canonical  Jewish  predecessors  and  con- 
temporaries is  a  similarity  at  most  of  form;  in  spirit  and  content  the 
difference  is  incalculable.  Unlike  these  other  works,  the  Apocalypse 
is  a  genuine  prophecy. 

3.  THE  MESSAGES  TO  THE  SEVEN  CHURCHES 

The  so-called  letters  to  the  seven  churches  were  never  intended 
to  be  circulated  separately.  From  the  beginning  the  letters  formed 
part  of  the  Apocalypse,  which  was  addressed  to  all  seven  of  the 
churches.  From  the  beginning,  therefore,  each  of  the  letters  was 
intended  to  be  read  not  only  by  the  church  whose  name  it  bears, 
but  also  by  all  the  others.  The  seven  churches,  moreover,  are 
representative  of  the  Church  at  large. 

Nevertheless,  despite  the  universal  purpose  of  the  letters,  they 
are  very  concrete  in  the  information  that  they  provide  about  the 
churches  in  Asia  Minor.  Like  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of 
John  they  illumine  an  exceedingly  obscure  period  in  the  history 
of  Christianity. 

(1)  The  "Angels"  of  the  Churches. — Some  details  in  the  letters, 
it  is  true,  are  to  us  obscure.  What,  for  example,  is  meant  by  the 
"angels"  of  the  churches  to  which  the  several  letters  are  addressed? 
The  Greek  word  translated  "angel"  may  also  mean  simply  "mes- 
senger." Conceivably,  it  might  designate  merely  a  congregational 
officer.  Many  have  supposed  that  it  designates  a  bishop.  In  the 
epistles  of  Ignatius,  which  were  written  not  very  many  years  after 
the  Apocalypse,  the  term  "bishop"  is  applied  to  an  officer  who  had 


THE  MESSAGES  OF  THE  LIVING  CHRIST  207 

supreme  authority  over  a  congregation  including  the  presbyters. 
The  appearance  of  these  "angels"  or  "messengers"  in  the  Apocalypse 
has  been  urged  as  proof  that  John  as  well  as  Ignatius  recognized 
the  institution  of  the  episcopacy. 

Surely,  however,  the  matter  is  more  than  doubtful.  The  Greek 
word  used,  whether  it  be  translated  "angel"  or  "messenger,"  is  a 
very  strange  designation  of  a  bishop.  Moreover,  in  the  rest  of  the 
Johannine  literature  there  is  no  recognition  of  the  episcopacy.  In 
the  Third  Epistle  of  John,  for  example,  even  if  Diotrephes  had  set 
himself  up  as  a  bishop — which  is  itself  exceedingly  doubtful — his 
claim  is  certainly  not  accepted  by  the  apostle. 

On  the  whole,  it  seems  better  to  regard  the  "angels"  to  which  the 
seven  letters  of  the  Apocalypse  are  addressed  merely  as  ideal 
representatives  of  the  churches — representatives  conceived  of 
perhaps  as  guardian  angels.     Compare  Matt.  18  :  10. 

(2)  The  Nicolaitans. — Another  puzzling  question  concerns  the 
"Nicolaitans"  who  appear  in  several  of  the  letters.  The  name  itself 
is  obscure.  By  tradition  it  is  connected  with  that  Nicolaiis  of 
Antioch  who  was  one  of  the  seven  men  appointed  in  the  early  days 
of  the  Jerusalem  church  to  attend  to  the  administration  of  charity. 
Acts  6  :  5.  The  tradition  may  possibly  be  correct.  If  it  is  correct, 
then  Nicolaiis,  in  his  later  life,  had  not  justified  the  confidence 
originally  reposed  in  him. 

At  the  first  mention  of  the  Nicolaitans,  in  the  letter  to  Ephesus, 
Rev.  2  :  6,  nothing  whatever  is  said  about  their  tenets.  Their 
error,  however,  was  not  merely  theoretical,  but  practical,  for  it  was 
their  "works"  that  the  Lord  is  represented  as  hating.  In  the  letter 
to  Pergamum,  the  Nicolaitans  are  probably  meant  in  v.  14.  Like 
Balaam,  they  enticed  the  people  of  God  to  idolatry  and  impurity. 
The  form  which  their  idolatry  took  was  the  eating  of  meats  offered 
to  idols.  The  question  of  meats  offered  to  idols  was  no  simple 
matter.  In  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  Paul  had  per- 
mitted the  eating  of  such  meats  under  certain  circumstances,  but 
had  sternly  forbidden  it  wherever  it  involved  real  or  supposed 
participation  in  idolatrous  worship.  The  form  in  which  it  was 
favored  by  the  Nicolaitans  evidently  fell  under  the  latter  category. 
In  a  time  of  persecution,  the  temptation  to  guilty  compromise  with 
heathenism  must  have  been  insidious;  and  also  the  low  morality  of 
the  Asian  cities  threatened  ever  and  again  to  drag  Christian  people 
back  into  the  impure  life  of  the  world. 

In  the  letter  to  Thyatira,  also,  "the  woman  Jezebel"  is  apparently 


208  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

to  be  connected  with  the  same  sect,  for  the  practical  faults  in 
Thyatira  and  in  Pergamum  were  identical.  Jezebel,  the  Phoenician 
wife  of  Ahab,  was,  like  Balaam,  a  striking  Old  Testament  example 
of  one  who  led  Israel  into  sin.  It  is  significant  that  the  woman 
Jezebel  in  Thyatira  called  herself  a  prophetess.  Rev.  2  :  20.  This 
circumstance  seems  to  indicate  that  the  Nicolaitans  had  excused 
their  moral  laxness  by  an  appeal  to  special  revelations.  The  im- 
pression is  confirmed  by  v.  24.  Apparently  the  Nicolaitans  had 
boasted  of  their  knowledge  of  the  "deep  things,"  and  had  despised 
the  simple  Christians  who  contented  themselves  with  a  holy  life. 
At  any  rate,  whatever  particular  justification  the  Nicolaitans 
advanced  for  their  immoral  life,  they  could  not  deceive  the  all- 
searching  eye  of  Christ.  Their  "deep  things"  were  deep  things, 
not  of  God,  but  of  Satan! 

Who  is  meant  by  "the  woman  Jezebel"?  Some  interpreters,  who 
suppose  that  the  "angel"  of  the  church  was  the  bishop,  regard 
Jezebel  as  a  designation  of  the  bishop's  wife.  This  whole  inter- 
pretation is,  however,  beset  with  serious  difficulty.  Perhaps  "the 
woman  Jezebel"  does  not  refer  to  an  individual  at  all,  but  is  simply 
a  figurative  designation  of  the  Nicolaitan  sect.  The  description  of 
the  coming  retribution  in  vs.  21-23  seems  to  be  highly  figurative. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  sin  of  the  churches  at  Pergamum  and 
Thyatira  was  not  limited  to  those  who  actually  accepted  the 
Nicolaitan  teaching.  Even  to  endure  the  presence  of  the  guilty 
sect  was  the  object  of  the  Lord's  rebuke.  Toward  the  works  of  the 
Nicolaitans  only  hatred  was  in  place.  Rev.  2  : 6.  That  is  a 
solemn  lesson  for  modern  indifferentism.  Tolerance  is  good;  but 
there  are  times  when  it  is  a  deadly  sin. 


In  the  Library. — Purves,  "Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age," 
pp.  274,  308-312.  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Purves  (supple- 
mented), article  on  "Revelation."  M'Clymont,  "The  New  Testament 
and  Its  Writers,"  pp.  150-155.  Milligan,  "Lectures  on  the  Apocalypse" 
and  "Discussions  on  the  Apocalypse."  Ellicott,  "A  New  Testament 
Commentary  for  English  Readers,"  vol.  iii,  pp.  523-641:  Carpenter, 
"The  Revelation  of  St.  John."  Ramsay,  "The  Letters  to  the  Seven 
Churches  of  Asia."  Plumptre,  "A  Popular  Exposition  of  the  Epistles 
to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia."  Swete,  "The  Apocalypse  of  St. 
John."  Zahn,  "Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,"  vol.  iii,  pp. 
384-449.  The  two  last-named  works  are  intended  primarily  for  those 
who  have  some  knowledge  of  Greek,  but  can  also  be  used  by  others. 


LESSON   XXXVIII 

A  VISION  OF  THE  FINAL  TRIUMPH 

The  Book  of  Revelation  (Second  Lesson) 


1.  THE  INTERPRETATIONS  OF  THE  APOCALYPSE 

The  interpretations  of  the  Apocalypse  may  be  divided  into 
four  classes. 

(1)  Unfulfilled  Prophecies. — According  to  one  method  of  inter- 
pretation, the  prophecies  of  the  book  are  all  unfulfilled.  In  the 
last  days  there  will  be  a  mighty  revival  of  evil  like  that  which  is 
symbolized  by  the  dragon  and  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet,  there 
will  be  plagues  and  woes  like  those  which  are  described  in  connec- 
tion with  the  seals  and  the  trumpets  and  the  bowls,  and  there  will 
be  a  triumph  of  God's  people  and  an  eternal  blessedness  of  the  new 
Jerusalem.  This  interpretation  would  place  the  Apocalypse  out  of 
analogy  with  the  other  prophecies  of  the  Bible.  Prophecy  is  seldom 
out  of  all  connection  with  the  immediate  present.  Even  where  the 
prophetic  vision  reaches  to  the  very  end  of  time,  the  fulfillment  or 
the  preparation  for  the  fulfillment  is  usually  represented  as  begin- 
ning at  once.  In  the  Apocalypse,  as  in  other  prophecy,  there  is 
evident  reference  to  the  circumstances  of  the  original  readers. 

(2)  Contemporary  Events. — A  second  method  of  interpretation 
goes  to  an  opposite  extreme.  By  this  method  the  prophecies  of  the 
book  are  thought  to  be  concerned  merely  with  events  of  the  writer's 
own  age.  "The  beast"  is  the  Roman  Empire;  "Babylon"  is  the 
city  of  Rome;  the  author  expected  the  destruction  of  both  to  take 
place  within  a  few  years'  time.  In  its  thoroughgoing  form  this 
interpretation  also  is  to  be  rejected.  It  degrades  the  Apocalypse 
to  the  level  of  a  mistaken  prediction,  and  reduces  the  self-evidencing 
glories  of  the  book  to  trivialities.  Evidently  the  outlook  of  the  seer 
was  far  broader  and  far  more  spiritual  than  it  is  represented  by  the 
advocates  of  this  interpretation. 

(3)  The  Whole  History  of  the  Church. — By  a  third  method  of 
interpretation,  the  first  two  methods  are  combined.  The  book  is 
written  distinctly  in  view  of  conditions  of  the  first  century,  its 
predictions  concern  partly  the  immediate  future;  but  there  is  also 

Sen.  T.  m.  3.  200 


210  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

an  outlook  upon  remoter  ages.  By  this  interpretation  the  proph- 
ecies are  held  to  provide  an  epitome  of  the  whole  of  history  from 
the  first  coming  of  Christ  to  his  second  coming. 

(4)  Mixture  of  Discordant  Traditions. — A  fourth  method  of  in- 
terpretation, which  has  become  influential  in  very  recent  years, 
abandons  all  hope  of  discovering  a  unitary  message  in  the  book,  and 
proceeds  to  divide  it  into  its  component  parts.  The  analysis  was 
carried  on  first  by  literary  criticism.  An  older  work  of  the  time  of 
Nero  was  supposed  to  have  been  revised  at  a  later  period;  or  non- 
Christian  Jewish  works  were  supposed  to  have  been  incorporated 
in  the  present  work  by  a  Christian  compiler.  This  sort  of  literary 
criticism  has  in  the  last  few  years  given  place  sometimes  to  a  subtler 
method.  Investigation  is  now  directed  to  the  materials  of  which 
the  book  is  composed,  whether  those  materials  were  embodied  in 
previous  literary  works  or  only  in  previous  traditions.  The  ulti- 
mate source  of  much  of  the  material  is  found  in  Babylonia  or  other 
eastern  countries;  this  material  is  thought  to  be  not  always  in  accord 
with  the  context  into  which  in  our  Apocalypse  it  has  been  introduced. 

This  method  must  emphatically  be  rejected.  It  contains,  indeed, 
an  element  of  truth.  Undoubtedly  the  Apocalypse  makes  use  of 
already-existing  materials.  But  these  materials  are,  for  the  most 
part  at  least,  of  genuinely  Hebrew  origin;  and  they  have  been 
thoroughly  assimilated  for  the  purposes  of  the  present  prophecy. 
The  Apocalypse  is  not  a  compilation  full  of  contradictions,  but  a 
unitary  work,  with  one  great  message  for  the  Church. 

(5)  Wrong  Use  of  the  Third  Method. — Of  these  four  methods  of 
interpretation  the  third  has  been  adopted  in  the  Student's  Text 
Book.  The  prophecies  of  the  Apocalypse  concern  the  entire  history 
of  the  Church.  Undoubtedly  this  interpretation  is  subject  to 
abuse.  It  has  been  employed  in  the  interests  of  special  con- 
troversy, as  when  the  Protestants  saw  in  the  scarlet  woman  a 
representation  of  papal  Rome. 

(6)  Principles,  Not  Individual  Facts. — All  such  abuses  may  be 
avoided,  however,  if  the  interpreter  will  remember  that  the  book 
deals  with  great  principles,  rather  than  with  individual  facts. 
The  beast  is  neither  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  nor  the  religion 
of  Mohammed,  nor  the  Turkish  Empire.  Undoubtedly  it  expressed 
itself  in  some  phases  of  each  of  those  institutions.  But  no  one  of 
them  can  be  identified  with  it  outright.  The  beast  of  the  Apocalypse 
is  nothing  less  than  the  blatant,  godless  power  of  worldly  empire, 
however  that  power  may  be  manifested.     At  the  time  of  John  it 


A  VISION  OF  THE  FINAL  TRIUMPH  211 

was  manifested  especially  in  the  empire  of  Rome.  Even  Rome, 
however,  cannot  be  identified  with  the  beast  entirely  without 
qualification.  Even  Rome  had  its  beneficent  side.  John  as  well 
as  Paul,  even  in  the  fire  of  persecution,  might  have  expressed  the 
thought  of  Rom.  13  :  1-7.  Peter  also  wrote  in  the  midst  of  per- 
secution; yet  Peter  could  say,  "Be  subject  to  every  ordinance  of 
man  for  the  Lord's  sake:  whether  to  the  king,  as  supreme;  or  unto 
governors,  as  sent  by  him  for  vengeance  on  evil-doers  and  for  praise 
to  them  that  do  well."     I  Peter  2  :  13,  14. 

The  other  side  of  Rome's  power,  it  is  true,  was  prominent  at  the 
close  of  the  first  century.  More  systematically  than  before,  Rome 
had  begun  to  persecute  the  Church  of  God.  By  the  demand  of 
emperor-worship  she  had  tried  to  put  her  stamp  upon  the  followers 
of  Jesus.  Through  her  priesthood  she  had  endeavored  to  lead  men 
astray.  In  these  things  she  was  a  manifestation  of  the  beast.  As 
such  she  was  execrated  and  resisted  to  the  death  by  every  loyal 
Christian.  There  could  be  no  hope  of  compromise.  Hope  lay 
rather  in  the  power  of  God.  God  would  give  the  just  reward;  God 
would  give  the  final  victory.  Such  was  the  message  of  the 
Apocalypse. 

The  message  is  of  perennial  value.  The  beast  is  not  yet  dead. 
His  methods  are  different,  but  still  he  oppresses  the  Church. 
Wherever  his  power  is  felt — whether  in  ruthless  oppression  or 
impious  warfare  or  degrading  superstition — there  the  prophecy  of 
John   is   a   comfort   and   an   inspiration   to   the   people    of   God. 

Undoubtedly  this  method  of  interpretation,  which  detects  in  the 
book  principles  rather  than  individual  facts,  involves  a  reduction 
in  the  amount  of  direct  information  which  the  Apocalypse  may  be 
thought  to  give.  A  detailed  account,  whether  of  the  progress  of  the 
Church,  or  of  the  final  catastrophe,  is  by  this  interpretation  no 
longer  found  in  the  book. 

2.  THE  THOUSAND  YEARS 

At  one  point  at  least,  this  conclusion  has  been  regarded  by  many 
devout  Christians  as  involving  a  serious  loss.  That  point  is  con- 
cerned with  the  thousand  years  of  Rev.  20  :  1-8.  According  to  the 
interpretation  that  has  just  been  advocated,  the  thousand  years  are 
merely  a  symbol  for  the  time  of  the  present  Christian  dispensation, 
and  the  rule  which  the  saints  are  represented  as  bearing  with  Christ 
probably  refers  to  the  condition  of  the  blessed  dead  up  to  the  final 
resurrection.     To  many  devout  readers  of  the  Bible  this  interpreta- 


212  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

tion  seems  to  be  an  impoverishment  of  the  prophet's  words.  In 
reality,  they  maintain,  the  passage  predicts  a  return  of  Jesus  to 
earth  before  the  final  judgment,  and  a  long  period  of  his  blessed  sway. 
Undoubtedly  this  more  literal  interpretation  of  the  millennium 
seems  at  first  sight  to  be  required  by  certain  phrases  of  the  passage. 
But  the  highly  figurative  character  of  apocalyptic  language  must 
always  be  borne  in  mind.  Numbers,  in  the  Apocalypse,  are  usually 
symbolic;  so  it  may  be  with  the  thousand  years.  During  the 
present  dispensation  Satan  is  in  one  sense  bound,  and  in  another 
sense  he  is  free.  In  principle  he  has  been  conquered;  but  in  the 
sphere  of  worldly  power  he  continues  to  work  his  wrathful  will. 

3.  THE  CHRISTIAN  HOPE 

One  thing  at  least  is  clear.  No  interpretation  of  the  Apocalypse 
is  correct  if  it  fails  to  do  justice  to  the  hope  of  Christ's  return.  If 
the  figurative  interpretation  weakens  our  expectation  of  that  dread 
meeting  with  the  Lord,  then  it  is  untrue  to  the  mind  of  the  Spirit. 
There  are  difficulties  connected  with  the  idea  of  a  literal  millennium; 
but  such  difficulties  are  inconsiderable  in  comparison  with  those 
that  result  from  any  rationalizing,  any  explaining  away,  of  the 
universal  Christian  hope.  The  Apocalypse,  according  to  any 
right  interpretation,  is  a  vision  of  final  triumph. 

That  triumph  is  a  triumph  of  Christ.  Back  of  all  the  lurid 
imagery  of  the  book,  back  of  the  battles  and  the  woes,  and  back  of 
the  glories  of  God's  people,  stands  the  figure  of  the  Saviour.  With 
him  the  book  began,  and  with  him,  too,  it  ends.  He  is  the  same 
who  lived  the  life  of  mercy  and  of  glory  on  earth,  the  same  who  died 
for  our  sins  on  the  cross.  To  the  Lamb  all  power  is  given — all 
power  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  By  him  all  enemies  are  conquered; 
by  him  the  whole  earth  will  be  judged.  To  those  who  bear  the 
mark  of  the  beast  he  is  an  Avenger;  to  his  Church  he  is  an  ever- 
living  Saviour. 


In  the  Library. — The  reading  suggested  under  Lesson  XXXVII 
is  intended  for  both  of  the  lessons  on  the  Apocalypse. 


LESSON   XXXIX 
REVIEW 


This  review  lesson  is  fully  as  important  as  any  other  lesson  of  the 
first  three  quarters.  Without  reviewing,  the  study  of  history  is 
unproductive;  only  a  review  can  make  of  the  facts  a  permanent 
possession.  The  story  of  the  apostolic  age,  as  it  is  narrated  in  the 
work  of  Luke,  is  really  very  simple;  it  becomes  confusing  only  when 
it  is  imperfectly  mastered.  A  little  time  spent  in  turning  over  the 
pages  of  the  Lucan  narrative,  or  even  of  the  Student's  Text  Book, 
will  accomplish  wonders. 

1.  UNANSWERED  QUESTIONS 

The  New  Testament  account  of  the  apostolic  age  is  indeed  only 
fragmentary.  Many  questions  must  be  left  unanswered.  Of  the 
original  twelve  apostles  only  Peter  and  the  sons  of  Zebedee  and  Judas 
Iscariot  receive  in  The  Acts  anything  more  than  a  bare  mention; 
and  even  the  most  prominent  of  these  disappears  after  the  fifteenth 
chapter.  What  did  Paul  do  in  Arabia  and  in  Tarsus?  What  was 
the  origin  of  the  great  church  at  Alexandria?  Who  founded  the 
church  at  Rome?  These  questions,  and  many  like  them,  must 
forever  remain  unanswered. 

If,  moreover,  even  the  period  covered  by  The  Acts  is  obscure,  far 
deeper  is  the  darkness  after  the  guiding  hand  of  Luke  has  been 
withdrawn.  For  the  death  of  the  apostle  Paul,  there  is  only  a 
meager  tradition;  the  latter  years  of  Peter  are  even  more  obscure. 
For  the  important  period  between  the  release  of  Paul  after  his  first 
Roman  imprisonment  and  the  death  of  the  apostle  John  at  about 
the  end  of  the  first  century,  anything  like  a  connected  narrative  is 
quite  impossible. 

2.  THE  NERONIAN  PERSECUTION 

A  few  facts,  however,  may  still  be  established.  The  Roman 
historian  Tacitus  tells  of  a  persecution  of  the  Christians  at  Rome  at 
the  time  of  the  burning  of  the  city  in  A.  D.  64.  The  emperor  Nero, 
suspected  of  starting  the  fire,  sought  to  remove  suspicion  from  him- 
self by  accusing  the  Christians.     The  latter  had  already  become 

Sen.  T.  III.  3.  213 


214  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

unpopular  because  of  their  peculiar  ways,  and  were  thought  to  be 
guilty  of  abominable  crimes;  but  the  cruelty  of  Nero  almost  exceeded 
the  wishes  of  the  populace.  The  Christians  were  put  to  death  under 
horrible  tortures.  Many  were  burned,  and  their  burning  bodies 
served  as  torches  to  illumine  the  emperor's  gardens. 

The  beheading  of  Paul  has  often  been  brought  into  connection 
with  this  persecution,  but  more  probably  it  occurred  a  few  years 
later.  Paul  had  been  released  from  his  first  imprisonment,  and  his 
second  imprisonment,  at  the  time  of  the  Neronian  outbreak,  had 
not  yet  begun. 

The  extent  of  the  Neronian  persecution  cannot  be  determined 
with  certainty.  Probably,  however,  although  there  was  no  syste- 
matic persecution  throughout  the  empire,  the  provinces  would  not 
be  altogether  unaffected  by  what  was  happening  at  Rome.  The 
causes  of  popular  and  official  disfavor  were  always  present;  it  re- 
quired only  a  slight  occasion  to  bring  them  actively  into  play. 

3.  THE  DESTRUCTION  OF  JERUSALEM 

Even  more  important  than  the  Roman  persecution  of  A.  D.  64 
was  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  A.  D.  70.  At  the  outbreak  of 
the  war  which  culminated  in  that  catastrophe,  the  Jerusalem 
Christians  took  refuge  in  Pella,  east  of  the  Jordan;  Jerusalem  ceased 
to  be  the  center  of  the  Christian  Church.  After  the  war,  the 
Jerusalem  church  never  regained  its  old  position  of  leadership;  and 
specifically  Jewish  Christianity,  suffering  by  the  destruction  of  the 
national  Jewish  life,  ceased  to  be  influential  in  Christian  history. 

4.  THE  PROGRESS  OF  THE  GOSPEL 

From  the  years  between  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
closing  years  of  the  century,  scarcely  any  definite  incidents  can  be 
enumerated.  Undoubtedly  the  missionary  activity  of  the  Church 
was  continuing;  the  gospel  was  making  rapid  progress  in  its  conquest 
of  the  empire.  In  this  missionary  activity  probably  many  of  the 
twelve  apostles  were  engaged;  but  details  of  their  work  are 
narrated  for  the  most  part  only  in  late  tradition. 

5.  JOHN  AT  EPHESUS 

At  some  time — whether  before  or  after  A.  D.  70  is  uncertain — the 
apostle  John  went  to  Ephesus,  and  there  became  the  leader  of  the 
Asian  church.  Detailed  information  about  his  position  and  the 
churches  under  his  care  is  provided  not  only  in  trustworthy  tradi- 

Sen.  T.  m.  3. 


REVIEW  215 

tion — especially  that  which  comes  through  Irenaeus  from  Poly  carp, 
the  hearer  of  John— but  also  in  the  writings  of  John  himself.  The 
two  shorter  epistles  of  John,  though  each  embraces  only  a  small  page, 
are  extraordinarily  rich  in  information  about  congregational  matters, 
and  even  more  instructive  are  the  seven  messages  of  the  Apocalypse. 
By  means  of  the  latter  the  moral  condition  of  the  church  in  Asia 
Minor  is  characterized  with  a  vividness  that  is  scarcely  to  be 
paralleled  for  any  other  period  of  the  apostolic  age. 

6.  THE  PERSECUTION  UNDER  DOMITIAN 

During  the  latter  part  of  the  residence  of  John  in  Asia  Minor 
there  was  an  important  event  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  This 
was  the  outbreak  of  the  persecution  under  Domitian — a  persecution 
which  apparently  exceeded  in  extent,  if  not  in  severity,  every  per- 
secution that  had  preceded  it.  Under  Domitian  the  Roman 
authorities  became  definitely  hostile;  apostasy  from  Christ  was 
apparently  demanded  systematically  of  the  Christians— apostasy 
from  Christ  and  adhesion  to  the  imperial  cult.  The  latter,  in  the 
Apocalypse,  is  represented  as  an  example  of  the  mark  of  "the 
beast";  the  Roman  Empire,  as  would  have  been  unnatural  in  the 
days  of  Paul,  appears  in  that  book  as  an  incorporation  of  Satanic 
power.  The  long  conflict  between  the  Church  and  the  empire  had 
at  last  begun.  Which  side  would  be  victorious?  In  the  Apocalypse 
the  answer  is  plain.     The  Lord  himself  was  fighting  for  his  Church! 

7.  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  GOSPEL 

Our  knowledge  of  the  apostolic  age,  though  fragmentary,  is 
sufficient — sufficient  not  indeed  for  a  complete  history,  but  for  the 
requirements  of  Christian  faith.  The  information  provided  in  the 
New  Testament  makes  up  in  quality  for  what  it  lacks  in  quantity. 
Its  extraordinary  vividness  and  concreteness  possesses  a  self- 
evidencing  value.  The  life  of  the  apostle  Paul — revealed  with 
unmistakable  fidelity — is  itself  a  sufficient  bulwark  against  historical 
skepticism;  it  involves  inevitably  the  supernatural  Christ.  The 
gospel  is  no  aspiration  in  the  hearts  of  dreamers;  it  is  a  real  entrance 
of  divine  power  into  the  troubled  battle  field  of  human  history. 
God  was  working  in  the  apostolic  Church,  God  is  speaking  in  the 
New  Testament — there  is  the  summation  of  our  study. 


Sen.  t.  m.  3. 


PART   IV  I 


The  Apostolic  Church  and  the 
Church  of  To-Day 


LESSON  XL 
THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  WORLD 


The  apostolic  Church,  as  was  observed  in  the  Student's  Text 
Book,  found  itself  from  the  beginning  in  the  midst  of  an  environ- 
ment more  or  less  actively  hostile.  If  we  had  been  in  Jerusalem  at 
about  the  year  30,  we  should  have  observed  a  small  group  of  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus,  outwardly  conforming  to  Jewish  customs,  but 
inwardly  quite  different  from  their  countrymen.  In  Corinth  and 
in  other  pagan  cities  of  the  Greco-Roman  world,  the  contrast  be- 
tween the  Church  and  its  environment  was  even  more  striking; 
these  cities  were  sunk  in  superstition  and  vice;  the  Church  was 
leading,  in  the  eyes  of  the  world,  a  very  peculiar  life. 

The  presence  of  a  common  enemy  led  in  the  apostolic  age  to  a 
closer  union  among  the  Christians  themselves,  and  so  it  will  always 
be.  When  Christian  people  realize  the  power  of  the  enemy  against 
whom  they  are  all  fighting,  then  they  will  have  no  time  to  fight 
among  themselves.  The  Christian  life  is  a  warfare  against  sin — 
sin  in  a  thousand  deadly  forms.  In  such  a  warfare,  if  we  are  to  be 
good  soldiers,  we  must  all  stand  shoulder  to  shoulder. 

The  apostolic  Church  was  waging  an  audacious  warfare  against 
the  intrenched  forces  of  heathenism  and  sin.  Fortunately  it  had  a 
Leader;  and  by  that  Leader  alone  it  won  the  victory.  The  Leader 
was  Christ.  The  primary  relation  of  the  soldier  is  the  relation  to 
the  commander;  the  relation  of  the  individual  soldiers  to  one  an- 
other is  dependent  upon  that.  So  we  shall  study  to-day  the  lord- 
ship of  Christ;  by  that  study,  the  work  of  the  whole  quarter  will  be 
introduced. 

1.     TERMS  DESCRIPTIVE  OF  DISCIPLESHIP 

The  lordship  of  Christ  may  profitably  be  studied  by  an  examina- 
tion of  some  of  the  various  names  which  in  the  New  Testament  are 
applied  to  the  Church  and  its  individual  members.  The  individual 
titles  should  be  studied  first.  After  all,  the  Church  exists  for  the 
individual  believer  rather  than  the  individual  believer  for  the 
Church.  The  primary  relation  is  the  relation  between  Christ  and 
the  individual  soul.  Brotherhood  comes  only  through  the  union 
of  individuals  with  a  common  Lord. 

219 


220  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(l)  "Christians." — Probably  the  first  title  that  occurs  to  us  to- 
day to  designate  the  individual  members  of  the  Church  is  the  title 
"Christian";  yet  as  a  matter  of  fact  that  title  appears  only  three 
times  in  the  New  Testament,  and  then  only  as  it  was  taken  from 
the  lips  of  unbelievers.  In  accordance  with  the  explicit  testimony 
of  Acts  11  :  26,  the  name  was  given  for  the  first  time  at  Antioch; 
it  had  no  place,  therefore,  in  the  early  Jerusalem  church.  A 
moment's  thought  will  reveal  the  reason.  The  name  "Christians" 
would  have  meant  to  a  Jew  adherents  of  the  "Christ,"  or  the 
"Messiah."  Obviously  no  Jew  would  have  applied  such  a  name 
specifically  to  the  disciples  of  Jesus;  for  all  the  Jews,  in  one  sense 
or  another,  were  adherents  of  the  Messiah.  The  Jews  were 
adherents  of  him  by  way  of  anticipation;  the  disciples  thought 
he  had  already  appeared;  but  all  earnest  Jews  alike  would  have 
rejoiced  to  be  called  by  his  name. 

Evidently  the  name  was  applied  in  Antioch  by  the  pagan  popu- 
lation. The  Church  had  become  so  clearly  separate  from  Judaism 
that  a  separate  name  for  it  was  required.  The  name  "Christian" 
suggested  itself  very  naturally.  "Jesus  Christ"  was  forever  on  the 
lips  of  these  strange  enthusiasts!  "The  Christ"  was  indeed  also 
spoken  of  by  the  Jews,  but  only  careful  observers  would  necessarily 
be  aware  of  the  fact.  The  Messianic  hope  was  an  internal  concern 
of  the  synagogues,  with  which  outsiders  would  usually  have  little 
to  do.  The  new  sect,  on  the  other  hand,  brought  the  title 
"Christ"  out  from  its  seclusion;  "Christ"  to  these  enthusiasts 
was  something  more  than  a  title,  it  was  becoming  almost  a  proper 
name;  like  "Jesus,"  it  was  a  designation  of  the  Founder  of  the  sect, 
and  accordingly  the  adjective  derived  from  it  could  be  used  to 
designate  the  sect  itself. 

In  Acts  26  :  28,  the  name  appears  as  used  by  Agrippa;  in  I  Peter 
4  :  16,  also,  it  is  evidently  taken  from  the  lips  of  the  opponents  of 
the  faith.  The  Christians,  however,  Peter  implies,  need  not  be 
ashamed  of  the  name  which  has  been  fastened  upon  them.  Rather 
let  them  strive  to  be  worthy  of  it!  It  is  the  highest  honor  to  be 
called  by  the  name  of  Christ;  and  if  they  are  true  "Christians," 
their  confession  will  redound  to  the  glory  of  God. 

In  modern  times,  the  name  is  often  misapplied;  the  use  of  it  is 
broadened  and  weakened.  Nations  are  declared  to  be  Christian 
although  only  a  very  small  percentage  of  their  citizens  really  deserve 
the  name;  teaching  is  called  Christian  though  it  is  only  similar  in 
some  respects  to  the  teaching  of  Christ.     Such  a  use  of  terms 


THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  WORLD        221 

should  be  avoided  wherever  possible;  the  original  poignancy  of  the 
designation  should  be  restored.  Properly  speaking,  "Christian" 
means  not  "like  Christ"  but  "subject  to  Christ."  A  Christian 
is  not  one  who  admires  Christ  or  is  impressed  with  Christ's  teach- 
ing or  tries  to  imitate  Christ,  but  one  to  whom  Christ  is  Saviour 
and  Lord. 

Are  we  willing  to  be  known  as  "Christians"  in  that  sense?  At 
the  time  of  First  Peter,  it  would  have  been  a  serious  question;  an 
affirmative  answer  would  have  meant  persecution  and  perhaps 
death.  But  it  is  also  a  serious  question  to-day.  Confession  of 
Christ  involves  solemn  responsibilities;  dishonor  to  the  "Chris- 
tian" means  dishonor  to  Christ;  the  unworthy  servant  is  a  dishonor 
to  his  Master.     But  let  us  not  fear;  Christ  is  Helper  as  well  as  Lord. 

(2)  "Disciples." — The  earliest  designation  of  the  [followers  of 
Jesus  was  "disciples"  or  "learners";  during  the  earthly  ministry 
perhaps  scarcely  any  other  designation  was  commonly  used. 
Jesus  appeared  at  first  as  a  teacher;  the  form  of  his  work  was  some- 
what like  that  of  other  teachers  of  the  Jews.  Nevertheless,  although 
he  was  a  teacher  from  the  beginning,  he  was  also  from  the  be- 
ginning something  more.  He  had  not  only  authority,  but  also 
power;  he  was  not  only  Teacher,  but  also  Saviour.  His  followers 
were  not  merely  instructed,  but  were  received  into  fellowship;  and 
that  fellowship  made  of  them  new  men.  "Disciples"  in  the  Gospels 
is  more  than  "learners"  or  "students";  it  is  a  fine,  warm,  rich  word; 
the  Teacher  was  also  Friend  and  Lord. 

The  same  term  was  continued  in  the  early  Palestinian  Church, 
and  the  resurrection  had  brought  an  incalculable  enrichment  of  its 
meaning.  The  "disciples"  were  not  merely  those  who  remembered 
the  words  of  Jesus,  but  those  who  had  been  redeemed  by  his  blood 
and  were  living  now  in  the  power  of  his  Holy  Spirit.  If  we  use  the 
term,  let  it  be  in  the  same  lofty  sense.  Let  us  be  learners,  indeed; 
let  us  hear  the  words  of  Jesus,  as  they  are  recorded  in  the  Gospels; 
but  let  us  hear  them  not  from  a  dead  teacher,  but  ever  anew  from 
the  living  Lord. 

(3)  "Saints." — A  third  designation  is  "saints."  This  term  is 
used  as  a  title  of  the  Christians  in  Acts  9  :  13,  32,  41;  26  :  10,  and 
frequently  in  the  epistles  of  Paul  and  in  the  Apocalypse.  Its  use 
in  the  New  Testament  is  very  different  from  some  uses  of  it  that 
appeared  at  a  later  time.  The  Roman  Catholics,  for  example, 
employ  the  term  as  a  title  of  honor  for  a  number  of  persons  carefully 
limited  by  the  Church;  Protestants  often  designate  by  it  persons 


222  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS; 

of  exceptional  purity  or  goodness.  In  the  New  Testament,  on  the 
contrary,  the  title  "saints"  is  clearly  applied  to  all  Christians. 

In  the  original  Greek  the  word  is  exactly  the  same  as  a  word 
meaning  "holy";  it  is  simply  the  adjective  "holy"  used  as  a  noun. 
"Saints,"  therefore,  really  means  "holy  persons."  Unfortunately, 
however,  the  word  "holy,"  as  well  as  the  word  "saint"'  has  under- 
gone modifications  of  usage.  "Holy,"  in  the  Bible,  is  not  sim- 
ply another  word  for  "good"  or  "righteous,"  but  expresses  a  some- 
what different  idea.  It  has  the  idea  of  "sacred"  or  "separate" — ■ 
separate  from  the  world.  God  is  holy  not  merely  because  he  is 
good,  but  because  he  is  separate.  Undoubtedly  his  goodness  is 
one  attribute — perhaps  the  chief  attribute — that  constitutes  the 
separateness ;  but  other  attributes  also  have  their  place.  His 
omnipotence  and  his  infinitude,  as  well  as  his  goodness,  make 
him  "holy." 

The  word  "holy"  or  "saint"  as  applied  to  Christians  has  funda- 
mentally the  same  meaning.  Believers  are  "holy"  because  they 
are  in  communion  with  the  holy  God  and  therefore  separate  from 
the  world.  Undoubtedly  the  most  obvious  element  in  their  sepa- 
rateness is  their  goodness;  the  moral  implications  of  the  term 
"holy"  are  sometimes  so  prominent  that  the  specific  meaning  of 
the  word  seems  obscured.  But  that  specific  meaning  is  probably 
never  altogether  lost.  Christians  are  called  "saints"  because  they 
are  citizens,  not  of  the  present  evil  world,  but  of  a  heavenly 
kingdom. 

The  familiar  word,  thus  interpreted,  has  a  startling  lesson  for  the 
modern  Church.  Can  modern  Christians  be  called  "saints,"  in 
the  New  Testament  sense?  Are  we  really  separate  from  the  world? 
Are  we  really  "a  chosen  generation,  a  royal  priesthood,  an  holy 
nation,  a  peculiar  people"  (A.  V.)?  Do  we  really  feel  ourselves  to 
be  strangers  and  pilgrims  in  the  earth?  Or  are  we  rather  salt  that 
has  lost  its  savor?     Have  we  become  merged  in  the  life  of  the  world? 

(4)  "Brethren." — A  fourth  designation  is  concerned,  not  with  the 
relation  of  the  believer  to  Christ  or  to  the  world,  but  with  the 
relation  of  believers  among  themselves.  That  designation  is 
"brethren."  It  is  a  very  simple  word;  it  requires  little  explanation; 
the  rich  meaning  of  it  will  be  unfolded  in  the  whole  of  this  quarter's 
study. 

(5)  "Church." — After  studying  the  New  Testament  terms  that 
denote  the  disciples  of  Jesus  individually, it  will  now  be  well  to  turn 
for  a  moment  to  the  chief  designation  of  the  body  of  disciples  con- 


THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  WORLD  223 

sidered  as  a  unit.  That  designation  is  "church,"  or  in  the  Greek 
form,    "ecclesia." 

The  word  "ecclesia"  is  in  itself  a  very  simple  term  indeed.  It  is 
derived  from  the  verb  "call"  and  the  preposition  "out."  An 
"ecclesia"  is  a  body  of  persons  called  out  from  their  houses  to  a 
common  meeting  place,  in  short  it  is  simply  an  "assembly,"  and  an 
assembly  of  any  kind.  This  simple  use  of  the  word  is  found  in 
Acts  19  :  32,  39,  41;  the  Greek  word  which  is  there  translated 
"assembly"  is  exactly  the  same  word  as  that  which  is  elsewhere 
translated  "church." 

Even  before  New  Testament  times,  however,  the  word  had  begun 
to  be  used  in  a  special,  religious  sense.  Here,  as  so  often,  the 
Septuagint  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  prepared  the  way  for 
New  Testament  usage.  In  the  Septuagint  the  word  "ecclesia" 
was  used  to  denote  the  solemn  assembly  of  the  people  of  Israel. 
That  assembly  was  of  course  religious  as  well  as  political;  for 
Israel  was  a  theocratic  nation.  Hence  it  was  no  abrupt  transition 
from  previous  usage  when  the  New  Testament  writers  selected  the 
word  "ecclesia"  to  denote  the  Christian  congregation. 

In  the  New  Testament,  the  word  is  used  in  various  ways.  In  the 
first  place,  it  designates  the  body  of  Christians  who  lived  in  any 
particular  place.  So,  for  example,  the  epistles  of  Paul  are  addressed 
to  individual  "churches."  In  the  second  place,  however,  the  word 
designates  the  whole  body  of  Christians  throughout  the  world. 
This  usage  is  prominent  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  but  it  also 
appears  even  in  the  Gospels,  in  the  memorable  words  of  Jesus  at 
Caesarea  Philippi.  Matt.  16  :  18.  It  is  a  wonderfully  grand  con- 
ception which  is  thus  disclosed  by  the  familiar  word.  "The  Church" 
is  a  chosen  people,  ruled  by  the  Lord  himself,  a  mighty  army, 
engaged,  not  in  earthly  warfare,  but  in  a  spiritual  campaign  of 
salvation  and  love. 

(6)  "The  Kingdom  of  God." — One  further  conception  requires 
at  least  a  word.  What  is  meant  by  "the  kingdom  of  God"?  This 
conception  is  evidently  related  to  the  conception  of  "the  Church," 
but  the  two  are  not  identical.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  simply  that 
place  or  that  condition  where  God  rules.  As  the  kingdom  of  Caesar 
was  the  territory  over  which  Caesar  held  sway,  so  the  kingdom  of 
God  is  the  realm  where  God's  will  is  done.  In  one  sense,  of  course, 
the  kingdom  of  God  embraces  the  whole  universe,  for  nothing  is 
beyond  the  reach  of  God's  power.  But  in  the  New  Testament  the 
term  is  used  in  a  far  deeper  sense;  it  is  used  to  denote  the  realm 


224  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

where  God's  will  is  done,  not  of  necessity,  but  by  willing  submission. 
Wherever  human  hearts  and  wills  are  in  true  accord  with  the  will 
of  God,  there  the  "kingdom"  has  come. 

In  one  sense  the  kingdom  of  God  belongs  to  the  future  age.  It  is 
never  realized  fully  upon  earth;  there  is  here  always  some  lurking 
trace  of  sinful  resistance.  Nevertheless,  in  the  New  Testament  the 
kingdom  is  by  no  means  always  represented  as  future.  Though 
it  has  not  yet  been  fully  realized,  it  is  already  present  in  principle; 
it  is  present  especially  in  the  Church.  The  Church  gives  clear, 
though  imperfect,  expression  to  the  idea  of  the  kingdom ;  the  Church 
is  a  people  whose  ruler  is  God. 

Entrance  into  the  Church  is  not  to  be  obtained  by  human  effort; 
it  is  the  free  gift  of  God  through  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  No  other 
gift  is  so  glorious.  If  we  are  members  of  that  chosen  people,  we 
need  fear  nothing  in  heaven  or  on  earth. 

2.  PRACTICAL  CONCLUSIONS 

Two  lessons  should  be  conveyed  by  our  study  of  to-day:  in  the 
first  place  the  lesson  of  separateness,  and  in  the  second  place  the 
lesson  of  unity.  Neither  can  be  truly  learned  without  the  other. 
There  can  be  no  true  Christian  unity  if  individual  members  of  the 
Christian  body  make  common  cause  with  the  unbelieving  world. 
A  knowledge  of  the  common  enemy  will  draw  us  all  into  closer 
fellowship.  That  fellowship  need  not  necessarily  be  expressed  in  a 
common  organization ;  but  it  will  be  expressed  at  least  in  a  common 
service.  Separateness  from  the  world  will  not  mean  leaving  the 
world  to  its  fate;  the  Christian  salvation  will  be  offered  freely  to  all. 
But  the  gravity  of  the  choice  should  never,  by  any  false  urbanity, 
be  disguised.  It  is  no  light  difference  whether  a  man  is  within  the 
people  of  God  or  without;  there  is  a  definite  line  of  demarcation, 
and  the  passing  of  it  means  the  transition  from  death  into  life. 


In  The  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on 
"Church,"  "Disciple,"  "Christian."  Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the 
Bible":  Gayford,  article  on  "Church."  Hort,  "The  Christian  Eccle- 
sia."  Charteris,  "The  Church  of  Christ."  Westcott,  "The  Two 
Empires:  The  Church  and  the  World,"  in  "The  Epistles  of  St.  John," 
pp.  250-282.  "The  Epistle  to  Diognetus,"  introduction  and  transla- 
tion in  Lightfoot,  "The  Apostolic  Fathers,"  pp.  487-489,  501-51 1. 
Erdman,  "Coming  to  the  Communion." 


LESSON   XLI 
THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE 


1.  A  PHILOSOPHY,  OR  A  TESTIMONY? 

In  the  Student's  Text  Book  the  Christian  message  has  been* 
represented  as  primarily  a  piece  of  good  news,  a  story  of  something 
that  happened.  That  representation  does  not  pass  unchallenged 
to-day.  Many  suppose  that  the  message  of  the  apostles  was  con- 
cerned simply  with  reflection  upon  eternal  truths.  For  centuries, 
it  is  said  in  effect,  men  had  been  reflecting  upon  the  problems  of  God 
and  the  world  and  sin;  what  the  apostles  did  in  Jerusalem  and  else- 
where was  simply  to  provide  better  instruction  on  these  great 
themes;  Jesus  had  taught  men  that  God  is  a  Father,  the  apostles 
simply  continued  his  teaching. 

Such  a  view,  of  course,  can  be  held  only  by  rejecting  or  distorting 
the  testimony  of  the  New  Testament.  If  the  book  of  The  Acts  is 
correct,  if  Paul  is  correct,  then  the  preaching  that  founded  the 
apostolic  Church  was  not  better  instruction  about  old  facts,  but 
information  about  a  new  fact.  Before  Jesus  came,  the  world  was 
lost  under  sin;  but  Jesus  lived  and  died  and  rose  again,  and  gave 
salvation  to  all  who  would  receive.  According  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, Jesus  did  not  come  to  tell  men  that  they  were  God's  children; 
he  came  to  make  them  God's  children.  John  1  :  12;  Gal.  4  :  3-5. 
Without  him  they  were  under  God's  wrath  and  curse;  but  by  faith 
in  him,  by  acceptance  of  his  sacrifice  of  himself  for  them,  by  re- 
ceiving from  his  Spirit  the  power  to  believe,  they  could  call  God 
Father.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost  Jesus  was  presented  as  more  than 
a  Teacher ;  he  was  presented  as  a  Saviour. 

2.  THE  EFFECTS  OF  THE  MESSAGE 

(1)  In  the  Apostolic  Age. — The  effects  of  that  presentation  have 
been  considered  briefly  in  the  Student's  Text  Book,  and  what  was 
said  there  might  easily  be  supplemented.  The  conversion  of  the 
three  thousand  was  only  a  beginning.  The  new  spirit  of  the 
Christian  community,  the  brotherly  love  and  holy  joy  of  the  dis- 
ciples, indeed  everything  that  will  be  treated  in  the  lessons  of  the 

Sen.  T.  III.  L  22$ 


226  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

quarter,  were  the  result  of  a  simple  piece  of  news.  By  the  wise  men 
of  the  world — then  as  now — the  message  was  despised,  but  "the 
foolishness  of  God  is  wiser  than  men;  and  the  weakness  of  God  is 
stronger  than  men."     I  Cor.  1  :  25. 

This  lesson  offers  a  singular  opportunity  to  the  teacher.  The 
Christian  message  in  the  apostolic  Church  was  a  message  of  power. 
The  story  of  its  progress  is  full  of  dramatic  vigor;  it  appeals  even 
to  the  non-Christian  historian.  The  story  of  the  apostolic  age  is 
full  of  surprises — the  sudden  transformation  of  bitter  Jewish 
enemies  into  humble  disciples;  the  triumphant  spread  of  the  faith 
when  everything  seemed  opposed;  the  establishment  of  Christian 
churches  in  the  very  centers  of  pagan  vice;  the  astonishingly  rapid 
preparation  for  the  conquest  of  the  empire;  and  all  this  accomplished 
not  by  worldly  wisdom,  but  by  simple  men  who  only  had  a  bit  of 
news — a  bit  of  news,  and  God! 

(2)  In  the  History  of  the  Church. — The  triumphs  of  the  gospel, 
however,  were  not  confined  to  the  age  of  the  apostles.  The 
apostolic  age  was  prophetic  of  the  Christian  centuries.  There 
were  many  days  of  darkness;  but  the  Church  always  emerged 
again  triumphant.  So  it  will  be  to-day.  God  has  not  deserted 
his  people;  he  will  attest  his  truth  with  the  power  of  his  Spirit; 
there  is  no  room  for  discouragement.  One  thing,  however,  should  be 
remembered ;  the  victories  of  the  Church  are  victories,  not  of  brilliant 
preachers,  not  of  human  wisdom  or  human  goodness,  but  of 
the  cross  of  Christ.     Under  that  banner  all  true  conquests  move. 

3.  THE  PRESENTATION  OF  THE  MESSAGE 

The  Christian  message  was  presented  in  the  apostolic  Church 
in  many  different  ways.  The  gospel  was  everywhere  essentially 
the  same,  but  the  presentation  of  it  was  adapted  to  the  needs  of 
particular  hearers,  and  the  understanding  of  it  became  ever  more 
complete  under  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  interesting 
to  collect  the  various  types  of  missionary  speeches  that  are  found  in 
the  New  Testament. 

(1)  The  Missionary  Preaching  of  the  Jerusalem  Church. — The 
early  chapters  of  The  Acts  preserve  a  number  of  speeches  that  were 
addressed  to  Jews.  As  might  have  been  expected,  these  speeches 
are  intended  primarily  to  prove  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus.  If  that 
could  be  proved,  then — among  the  Jews — the  rest  would  follow. 
The  Messiahship  was  proved  first  by  an  appeal  to  the  Scriptures,  and 
second  by  the  fact  of  the  resurrection.     Even  the  death  of  Jesus  on 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  227 

the  cross,  which  was  to  the  Jews  a  stumblingblock,  was  predicted 
by  the  prophets,  and  so  served  to  prove  that  Jesus  was  the  promised 
One.  The  resurrection  was  also  predicted;  and  the  resurrection 
was  established  first  by  the  simple  testimony  of  eyewitnesses  and 
second  by  the  wonderful  works  of  the  living  Christ. 

These  early  speeches  contain  only  a  little  of  the  full  truth  of  the 
gospel.  In  them,  for  example,  the  significance  of  the  death  of 
Christ  as  an  atonement  for  sin  is  not  fully  explained.  Such 
omissions  were  due  no  doubt  to  two  causes. 

(a)  Limitations  Due  to  the  Hearers. — In  the  first  place,  the 
peculiar  needs  of  the  hearers  had  to  be  considered.  The  hearers 
were  Jews;  to  them  the  death  of  the  Messiah  was  an  unheard-of 
paradox;  to  them  the  cross  was  a  stumblingblock.  Before  the  inner 
meaning  of  the  crucifixion  could  be  explained,  obviously  the  ob- 
jections derived  from  it  needed  to  be  overcome.  The  first  task  of 
the  missionaries  was  to  show  that  Jesus,  although  he  had  been 
crucified,  was  the  Messiah.  That  was  done  by  an  appeal  to  proph- 
ecy and  to  the  plain  fact  of  the  resurrection.  After  conviction 
had  thus  been  produced,  it  would  be  time  enough  to  show  that 
what  was  at  first  regarded  as  a  stumblingblock  was  really  the 
supreme  act  of  divine  grace. 

(b)  Limitations  Due  to  an  Early  Stage  of  Revelation. — The 
omissions  in  the  early  speeches  were  due,  however,  not  merely  to 
the  peculiar  needs  of  the  hearers,  but  also  to  limitations  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  apostles.  Christian  truth  was  not  all  revealed  at 
once;  undoubtedly  the  full  explanation  of  the  cross,  the  full  exposi- 
tion of  the  atonement,  was  revealed  only  when  the  disciples  could 
bear  it.  Such  is  the  divine  method,  even  in  revelation.  The 
disciples  were  brought  gradually,  by  the  gracious  leading  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  into  ever  richer  knowledge  of  the  truth. 

(c)  The  Significance  of  the  Cross. — Nevertheless,  the  meagerness 
of  the  early  teaching  must  not  be  exaggerated.  In  the  very  first 
missionary  speech  of  Peter,  Jesus  was  represented  as  "delivered  up 
by  the  determinate  counsel  and  foreknowledge  of  God."  Acts  2  :  23. 
What  happened  "by  the  determinate  counsel  ...  of  God"  was 
no  meaningless  chance ;  the  crucifixion  was  not  a  victory  of  evil  over 
God,  it  must  have  had  some  beneficent  purpose.  Furthermore, 
Jesus  himself  had  explained  what  that  purpose  was.  He  had 
spoken  of  giving  his  life  a  ransom  for  many,  Mark  10  :  45 ;  still 
more  plainly,  on  the  last  solemn  passover  evening,  he  had  repre- 
sented his  death  as  sacrificial.     These  words  were  certainly  not 


228  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

forgotten  in  the  Jerusalem  church;  they  were  called  to  mind  in  the 
repeated  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  must  have  formed  the 
subject  of  meditation.  The  Jerusalem  Christians  knew  that  Jesus' 
death  was  a  death  on  their  behalf. 

(d)  The  Lordship  of  Jesus. — The  lordship  of  Jesus,  moreover, 
was  fully  recognized  from  the  very  beginning.  The  risen  Christ 
had  ascended  into  glory,  and  had  poured  forth  his  mighty  Spirit. 
The  believer  was  no  mere  learner  of  the  words  of  a  dead  teacher;  he 
was  called  into  communion  with  a  Lord  and  Saviour.  Such  com- 
munion meant  nothing  less  than  an  entirely  new  life,  in  which  sin 
could  have  no  rightful  place.  It  was  a  life  of  conflict,  but  also  a 
life  of  hope.  The  Saviour  would  come  again  in  like  manner  as  he 
had  gone.  The  spiritual  victory,  already  won,  would  be  perfected 
by  a  final  victory  in  every  realm. 

(2)  The  Missionary  Preaching  of  Paul. — The  gospel  of  the  early 
preachers  was  a  glorious  message.  It  was  a  piece  of  glad  tidings, 
such  as  the  world  had  never  known.  Yet  even  greater  things  were 
in  store;  even  more  wondrous  mysteries  were  to  be  revealed.  They 
were  revealed  especially  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  apostle 
Paul.  The  gospel  had  been  preached  from  the  beginning,  but  much 
of  its  deeper  meaning  was  reserved  for  Paul. 

(a)  Truth  and  Error. — In  the  teaching  of  Paul,  truth  became 
plainer  by  being  contrasted  with  error.  The  original  apostles  had 
really  been  trusting  in  the  atonement  of  Christ  for  salvation;  but 
now  that  trust  became  plainer  and  more  explicit  by  being  con- 
trasted with  works  of  the  law.  The  original  apostles  had  really 
grasped  the  inner  significance  of  Jesus  as  the  fulfillment  of  the  Old 
Testament;  but  now  that  significance  became  still  plainer  by  the 
contrast  with  Pharisaic  legality.  Now  at  length  the  death  and 
resurrection  were  represented  sharply  and  clearly  as  great  representa- 
tive acts  in  which  the  believer  shares  through  faith.  The  original 
apostles  were  not  overwhelmed  and  confused  by  the  new  revelation ; 
they  recognized  the  grace  of  God.  Their  perfect  agreement  with 
Paul  exhibited  the  unity  of  the  apostolic  gospel. 

Scarcely  anything  would  be  more  interesting  than  a  full  collection 
of  the  missionary  speeches  of  Paul.  Such  a  collection,  however, 
has  not  been  preserved.  The  writings  that  we  possess  from  the 
hand  of  Paul  are  not  missionary  addresses,  but  letters  written  to 
those  who  were  already  Christians.  We  should  not,  however, 
complain  of  the  providence  of  God.  God  has  not  thought  good 
to  give  us  everything,  but  what  he  has  given  us  is  enough. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  MESSAGE  229 

(b)  Information  Provided  by  The  Acts. — The  book  of  The  Acts, 
in  the  first  place,  affords  valuable  information.  The  author  was 
interested,  indeed,  chiefly  in  beginnings.  The  examples  of  Paul's 
missionary  preaching  which  Luke  has  preserved,  are  perhaps 
preliminary  to  evangelism,  rather  than  evangelism  itself.  The 
speech  at  Pisidian  Antioch  shows  how  Paul  proved  the  Messiahship 
of  Jesus.  In  winning  the  Jews,  that  proof  was  the  first  step.  The 
Pauline  gospel  indeed  appears,  but  it  appears  only  at  the  very  end 
of  the  speech.  The  speech  at  Athens  is  still  more  clearly  of  pre- 
liminary character.  Monotheism  needed  to  be  established  before 
l he  gospel  of  Christ  could  be  understood.  Despite  their  necessary 
limitations  however,  these  speeches  are  instructive.  They  show, 
in  the  first  place,  that  Paul  adapted  his  preaching  to  the  needs  of  his 
hearers.  He  did  not  preach  the  same  sermon  mechanically  to  all. 
He  sought  really  to  win  men  over,  he  began  with  what  his  hearers 
could  understand.  They  show,  in  the  second  place,  that  all  pre- 
liminary matters  were  kept  strictly  subordinate.  These  matters 
were  not  made  an  end  in  themselves,  ,as  is  often  the  case  in  the 
modern  Church,  but  were  merely  a  means  to  an  end.  No  matter 
where  he  began,  Paul  always  proceeded  quickly  to  the  center  of 
the  gospel.  Both  at  Pisidian  Antioch  and  at  Athens,  he  hastened 
on  to  the  resurrection. 

(c)  Information  Provided  by  the  Epistles. — The  Pauline  Epistles, 
in  the  second  place,  though  they  are  addressed  to  Christians,  really 
afford  sufficient  information,  at  least  in  outline,  about  the  mis- 
sionary preaching  of  Paul.  Incidental  references  are  sufficient  to 
show  at  least  that  the  cross  and  the  resurrection  were  the  center  and 
core  of  it.  The  Thessalonians,  for  example,  under  the  preaching  of 
Paul,  "turned  unto  God  from  idols,  to  serve  a  living  and  true  God, 
and  to  wait  for  his  Son  from  heaven,  whom  he  raised  from  the  dead, 
even  Jesus,  who  delivereth  us  from  the  wrath  to  come."  This  little 
passage  is  worth  pages  of  exposition.  Preaching  to  Gentiles  is  here 
reviewed  in  epitome,  though  of  course  not  with  studied  symmetry 
and  completeness.  The  knowledge  of  the  one  true  God  formed  of 
course,  for  Gentiles,  the  starting  point  for  all  the  rest,  but  from  that 
starting  point  the  preacher  at  once  proceeded  to  tell  of  the 
work  of  Christ.  Just  as  illuminating  are  passages  like  I  Cor. 
2  :2;  Gal.  3:1.  In  Corinth  Paul  knew  nothing  save  "Jesus 
Christ,  and  him  crucified";  in  Galatia  the  story  of  the  cross 
was  made  so  plain  that  it  was  as  though  Jesus  Christ  crucified 
were  held  up  before  the  eyes  of  the  Galatians  on  a  great  picture 


230  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

or  placard.  The  famous  passage  in  First  Corinthians,  ch.  15  :  1-8, 
is,  however,  perhaps  clearest  of  all.  At  the  very  beginning  Paul 
had  spoken  of  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  resurrection.  The 
death,  moreover,  was  not  presented  as  a  mere  inspiring  story  of 
a  holy  martyrdom,  but  as  a  death  "for  our  sins";  and  the  resur- 
rection was  supported  not  primarily  by  an  inward  experience, 
but  by  simple  testimony. 

Apostolic  preaching  was  everywhere  essentially  the  same.  The 
apostles  never  began,  like  many  modern  preachers,  with  exhortation; 
though  they  proceeded  to  exhortation,  they  always  began  with 
facts.  What  was  always  fundamental  was  the  simple  story  of  the 
life  and  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ.  Jesus  Christ 
crucified  and  risen  was  the  subject  of  the  good  news  that  conquered 
the  world.  When  will  the  modern  Church  take  up  the  message  with 
new  power?  We  do  not  know.  The  times  are  in  God's  hand. 
But  when  the  blessed  day  comes,  it  will  be  a  day  of  victory. 


In  the  Library. — Bunyan,  "The  Pilgrim's  Progress."  Warfield, 
"The  Saviour  of  the  World,"  and  "The  Power  of  God  Unto  Salvation" 
(the  latter  in  "The  Presbyterian  Pulpit").     Hodge,  "The  Way  of  Life." 


LESSON   XLII 
THE  WORD  AND  THE  SACRAMENTS 


This  lesson  and  the  two  following  are  intended  primarily  to  en- 
courage in  the  student  the  diligent  use  of  "the  means  of  grace." 
The  wise  teacher  will  keep  the  practical  purpose  steadily  in  view. 
That  practical  purpose  may  now  be  examined  a  little  more  in  detail. 
Why  should  the  example  of  the  apostolic  Church  be  followed  in  the 
matter  of  Bible-reading,  of  the  sacraments,  of  prayer,  of  Christian 
meetings?  What  was  God's  purpose  in  providing  these  simple 
exercises  of  the  Christian  life — what  benefit  do  we  receive  from 
them?  Perhaps  the  briefest  and  simplest  answer  is  that  we  receive 
from  them  what  is  often  known  as  "reality"  in  religion. 

1.  REALITY  IN  RELIGION 

Many  Christians  are  puzzled  by  the  lack  of  the  sense  of  "reality" 
in  their  Christian  life.  They  have  believed  in  Christ,  but  often  he 
seems  far  from  them.  It  is  not  so  much  that  positive  doubts  have 
arisen,  though  certainly  the  lack  of  fervency  gives  doubt  its  oppor- 
tunity. Rather  is  it  an  inexplicable  dulling  of  the  spiritual  eye. 
The  gospel  still  seems  wonderful  to  the  intellect,  but  to  the  heart 
it  has  somehow  lost  its  power. 

(1)  The  Need  of  Diligence. — This  condition  is  due  very  often  to  a 
neglect  of  "the  means  of  grace,"  which  we  shall  study  in  this  lesson 
and  the  two  lessons  following.  It  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose 
that  the  spiritual  life  is  altogether  beyond  our  control.  Undoubtedly 
it  is  instituted  only  by  an  immediate  exercise  of  the  divine  power, 
independent  of  the  human  will;  undoubtedly  the  maintenance  of  it 
would  be  impossible  without  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Nevertheless,  in  that  work  of  maintenance,  we  have  a  very  definite 
part.  Many  Christians  suppose  that  any  performance  of  religious 
exercises  merely  for  duty's  sake,  without  immediate  spiritual  profit, 
is  a  mere  form.  This  supposition  is  erroneous.  Not  perform- 
ance of  religious  exercises  without  spiritual  profit,  but  per- 
formance of  them  without  the  desire  of  spiritual  profit,  is  formalism. 
The  appointed  means  of  grace  must  continue  to  be  used  even  when 

231 


232  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

no  immediate  benefit  can  be  discerned.  In  the  reading  of  the  Bible, 
in  prayer,  in  public  worship,  the  Christian  should  first  of  all  do  his 
duty.     The  result  may  safely  be  left  to  God. 

(2)  The  Danger  of  Neglect. — Without  such  attention  to  duty, 
the  Christian  life  becomes  merely  a  matter  of  inclination.  In 
times  of  great  spiritual  distress  we  call  upon  God  for  comfort  and 
help;  but  in  the  long,  level  weeks  of  comparative  prosperity  we 
think  we  can  do  without  him.  Such  thoughts  are  the  height  of 
folly.  God  is  not  our  servant,  he  is  not  one  who  can  safely  be  left 
out  of  our  thoughts  except  when  we  think  we  especially  need  him. 
If  we  neglect  God  in  time  of  prosperity,  we  may  call  in  vain  when 
adversity  comes. 

(3)  The  Reward  of  Duty. — The  religious  life  is  not  merely  a  matter 
of  inclination;  it  must  be  diligently  fostered.  Such  attention  to 
duty,  however,  will  never  be  merely  drudgery.  It  may  begin  with 
drudgery,  and  it  may  become  drudgery  again  at  times,  but  if  per- 
sisted in,  it  will  be  an  ever-widening  avenue  of  joy  and  power. 

2.  THE  STUDY  OF  THE  BIBLE 

The  reading  of  the  Bible  is  such  a  simple  thing,  and  so  obviously 
necessary  to  the  Christian  life,  that  it  requires  comparatively  little 
discussion.  Despite  its  indispensableness,  however,  it  is  being 
sadly  neglected  to-day.  Our  fathers  learned  the  Bible  with  a 
thoroughness  which  to-day  is  almost  unknown.  The  change  is  full 
of  danger.  A  Bible-reading  Church  is  possessed  of  power;  without 
the  Bible  the  Church  loses  its  identity  altogether  and  sinks  back 
into  the  life  of  the  world.  The  process,  unfortunately,  has  gone  to 
considerable  lengths.     How  may  it  now  be  checked? 

(1)  The  Study  Should  Be  Made  Interesting. — Something,  no 
doubt,  may  be  done  by  making  the  study  of  the  Bible  more  interest- 
ing. Certainly  the  Bible  does  not  yield  in  interest  to  any  other 
branch  of  knowledge.  The  Bible  does  not  merely  present  spiritual 
truth;  it  presents  it  in  a  wonderfully  rich  and  varied  way.  If  the 
study  of  the  Bible  is  stupid,  the  fault  lies  not  in  the  subject  matter, 
but  in  the  student  or  in  the  teacher. 

(2)  The  Motive  of  Duty. — Nevertheless,  a  mere  appeal  to  the 
interest  of  the  students  is  entirely  insufficient.  After  all,  there  is 
no  royal  road  to  learning — not  to  Biblical  learning  any  more  than  to 
the  learning  of  the  world.  Solid  education  can  never  be  attained 
without  hard  work;  education  that  is  easy  is  pretty  sure  to  be 
worthless.    Especially  at  the  beginning  the  chief  appeal  in  education 


THE  WORD  AND  THE  SACRAMENTS  233 

must  be  to  a  sense  of  duty.  So  it  is  in  the  case  of  the  Bible.  The 
Bible  is  the  word  of  God ;  obviously  it  may  not  be  neglected.  Let 
us  study  it,  then,  primarily  because  the  study  of  it  is  an  obvious 
duty.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  duty  will  soon  become  a  pleasure, 
but  let  not  that  be  the  motive.  Let  us  read  the  Bible  regularly  and 
persistently,  in  entire  independence  of  changing  impulse.  That  is 
the  kind  of  study  that  is  blessed  of  God.  Superficial  study,  deter- 
mined by  mere  inclination,  may  at  first  sight  seem  just  as  good. 
But  when  adversity  or  temptation  comes,  then  the  difference 
appears.  It  is  the  difference  between  a  house  built  upon  the  sand 
and  a  house  built  upon  the  rock.  The  two  houses  look  alike,  but 
when  the  rains  descend  and  the  floods  come,  one  falls  and  the  other 
stands.  The  Christian  whose  knowledge  of  the  Bible  is  obtained  by 
old-fashioned,  patient  study,  never  interrupted  by  changing  incli- 
nation, has  dug  deep  and  founded  his  house  upon  the  rock. 

(3)  The  Example  of  the  Apostolic  Church. — The  example  of  the 
apostolic  Church  in  the  matter  of  the  means  of  grace  is  especially 
significant.  In  the  apostolic  age,  it  might  have  seemed  as  though 
these  simple  exercises  might  be  dispensed  with.  What  need  of 
regularly  appointed  forms  when  the  Holy  Spirit  was  so  immedi- 
ately manifested?  Yet  as  a  matter  of  fact  all  of  the  essential 
forms  of  Christian  , custom  were  present  from  the  beginning. 
Regularity  and  diligence  were  cherished  even  in  the  first  exuberance 
of  the  Jerusalem  church.  Enthusiasm  of  spiritual  life  did  not  lead 
to  the  despising  of  ordinary  helps;  the  early  disciples  "continued 
stedfastly,"  "day  by  day,"  "with  one  accord  in  the  temple,  and 
breaking  bread  at  home,  they  took  their  food  with  gladness  and 
singleness  of  heart."     Acts  2  :  46. 

The  use  which  the  apostolic  Church  made  of  the  Bible  might  seem 
to  some  modern  men  particularly  surprising.  A  book  religion,  men 
say,  is  a  stagnant  religion;  living  faith  is  independent  of  dead  docu- 
ments; it  is  only  when  the  early  enthusiasm  is  lost  that  belief  be- 
comes crystallized  in  submission  to  venerable  authority.  This 
sort  of  religious  philosophy  shatters  on  the  plain  facts  of  the 
apostolic  age.  Admittedly  that  was  an  age  of  freshness  and  in- 
dependence. There  never  has  been  such  an  outburst  of  religious 
enthusiasm  as  that  which  planted  the  faith  in  Jerusalem  and  carried 
it  like  wildfire  throughout  the  civilized  world.  Yet  another  fact 
is  equally  plain — this  wonderful  enthusiasm  was  coupled  with  the 
utmost  reverence  for  a  book.  Nothing.could  exceed  the  unquestion- 
ing submission  which  the  early  Christians  paid  to  the  Old  Testa- 


234  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

ment  Scriptures.     The  exuberance  of  apostolic  Christianity  was 
intertwined  with  a  book  religion! 

The  explanation,  of  course,  is  simple.  Submission  to  a  human 
book  means  stagnation;  but  genuine  submission  to  the  Word  of  God 
means  always  what  it  meant  in  the  apostolic  age — heroism  and 
victory  and  life. 

3.  BAPTISM 

(1)  Baptism  and  Circumcision. — The  sacrament  of  baptism  had 
its  truest  predecessor  in  circumcision,  the  Old  Testament  sign  of 
union  with  the  covenant  people.  Baptism  as  well  as  circumcision 
is  a  sign  of  the  covenant,  though  the  varied  symbolism  marks  the 
advance  of  the  new  covenant  over  the  old. 

(2)  Christian  Baptism  and  the  Baptism  of  John. — In  form, 
moreover,  and  to  a  considerable  extent  also  in  meaning,  Christian 
baptism  in  the  early  Church  was  prepared  for  by  the  baptism  of 
John  the  Baptist,  which  had  even  been  continued  by  the  disciples 
of  Jesus  during  Jesus'  earthly  ministry.  John  4:1,  2.  Both  the 
baptism  of  John  and  Christian  baptism  symbolized  cleansing  from 
sin.     Compare  Acts  2  :  38  with  Matt.  3  :  6,  11. 

Christian  baptism,  however,  differed  from  every  rite  that  had 
preceded  it  by  its  definite  reference  to  Christ,  and  by  its  definite 
connection  with  a  new  manifestation  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(3)  Baptism  "Into  Christ." — In  the  apostolic  writings,  baptism 
is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  a  baptism  "into  Christ."  Gal.  3  :27; 
Rom.  6  :  3.  The  meaning  of  this  phrase  has  often  been  obscured 
both  in  translation  and  in  interpretation.  The  phrase  "into 
Christ"  in  this  connection  means  something  more  than  "with 
reference  to  Christ" ;  it  means  rather  "into  a  position  within  Christ." 
The  Christian,  according  to  a  common  Pauline  expression,  is  "in 
Christ";  he  is  in  such  close  union  with  Christ  that  the  life  of  Christ 
might  almost  be  described  as  the  atmosphere  which  he  breathes. 
To  be  baptized  "into  Christ"  means  to  come  by  baptism  into  this 
state  of  blessed  union  with  the  Saviour. 

(4)  Baptism  and  Faith. —  At  this  point,  however,  a  serious 
question  arises.  How  can  baptism  be  described  as  the  means  by 
which  the  Christian  comes  into  union  with  Christ,  when  at  other 
times  salvation  is  declared  to  be  by  faith?  One  solution  of  the 
difficulty  would  be  simply  to  say  that  baptism  and  faith  are  both 
necessary — a  man  must  believe  if  he  is  to  be  saved,  but  he  must  also 
be  baptized.  Clearly,  however,  this  view  does  not  represent  the 
meaning  of  the  New  Testament.     The  passages  where  faith  alone 


THE  WORD  AND  THE  SACRAMENTS  235 

is  represented  as  the  condition  of  salvation  are  too  strong;  especially 
the  vigorous  contrast  which  Paul  sets  up  between  faith  and  works 
prevents  any  inclusion  of  such  a  work  as  baptism  along  with  faith 
as  an  additional  condition  of  acceptance  with  God.  The  true 
solution  is  that  baptism  is  related  to  faith,  or  rather  to  the  regenera- 
tive work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,as  the  sign  is  related  to  the  thing 
signified.  Baptism  represents  the  work  of  the  Spirit;  it  is  a  means 
which  the  Spirit  uses.  If  it  stood  alone,  it  would  be  a  meaningless 
form,  but  when  it  is  representative  of  spiritual  facts  it  becomes  a 
channel  of  divine  grace. 

4.  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER 

The  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  Jerusalem  church 
was  probably  connected  in  some  way  with  "the  breaking  of  bread," 
which  is  mentioned  in  Acts  2  :  42.  Every  common  meal  was  an 
expression  of  Christian  communion,  but  the  solemn  words  of  Christ 
at  the  Last  Supper  could  not  have  been  forgotten.  Here,  as  so  often, 
the  book  of  The  Acts  affords  little  information  about  the  internal 
affairs  of  the  Church. 

Fortunately,  Paul,  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  is  far 
more  explicit,  and  inferences  can  be  drawn  from  him  with  regard 
even  to  Jerusalem.  Paul  represents  the  Lord's  Supper,  not  as  an 
innovation,  but  as  something  that  had  been  given  to  the  Corinthians 
as  a  matter  of  course,  at  the  very  beginning  of  their  Christian  lives; 
evidently  the  sacrament  was  celebrated  universally  in  the  churches; 
Paul  had  "received"  the  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Supper 
from  the  Lord  through  the  first  Christians. 

In  Corinth,  as  was  also  probably  the  case  in  the  early  days  in 
Jerusalem,  the  Supper  was  celebrated  in  connection  with  the  com- 
mon meals  of  the  Christian  community.  Certain  ahuses  had 
arisen;  the  rich  brought  food  and  drink  with  them  and  feasted 
luxuriously  in  the  presence  of  their  poorer  brethren;  the  spiritual 
significance  of  the  Supper  was  profaned.  Against  such  abuses 
Paul  enunciates  the  great  principle  that  the  Supper  does  not  work  a 
magical  benefit;  if  partaken  of  irreverently  it  brings  condemnation 
rather  than  blessing. 

In  I  Cor.  10  :  14-22,  the  Lord's  Supper  appears  as  a  warning 
against  participation  in  heathen  feasts.  The  pagan  fellow  citizens 
of  the  Corinthian  Christians,  by  their  religious  feasts,  held  com- 
munion with  idols;  the  Christians  cannot  remain  with  them  and  at 
the  same  time  commune  with  Christ.     A  man  must  take  his  choice — 


236  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

either  Christ  or  idols;  he  must  choose  either  the  Lord's  Supper  or 
heathen  feasts.  Here  the  Lord's  Supper  appears  especially  as  a  sign 
of  communion  with  Christ,  as  in  ch.  11  :  26  it  appears  especially  as 
a  commemoration  of  his  death.  These  two  aspects  of  the  Supper, 
and  their  intimate  connection  with  each  other,  should  now  be 
explained  a  little  more  in  detail. 

(1)  A  Representation  of  the  Death  of  Christ. — The  Lord's  Supper, 
as  is  observed  in  the  Student's  Text  Book,  is  representative  of  the 
death  of  Christ  on  our  behalf.  In  many  passages  of  the  New 
Testament,  the  significance  of  that  death  is  explained  in  words;  in 
the  Lord's  Supper  it  is  represented  in  visible  form.  The  Lord's 
Supper  is  related  to  the  story  of  the  gospel,  as  the  picture  or  the  acted 
representation  is  related  to  ordinary  discourse.  In  the  broken 
bread  and  poured-out  wine  we  not  only  apprehend  with  the 
mind,  but  actually  see  the  broken  body  and  shed  blood  of  the  Lord. 
Of  course  that  does  not  mean,  as  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
teaches,  that  the  bread  and  wine  are  actually  by  a  miracle,  at  every 
celebration  of  the  Supper,  changed  into  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  but  only  that  they  represent  them.  The  very  simplicity 
of  the  sacrament  should  have  guarded  against  misinterpretation. 
An  actual  image  of  the  dying  Saviour  might  lead  to  idolatry,  or 
to  an  overemphasis  upon  the  details  of  the  scene  on  Calvary; 
the  simple  representation  that  Christ  ordained  is  enough  to  be 
vivid,  without  being  enough  to  become  misleading. 

(2)  A  Representation  of  Our  Union  with  Christ. — The  Supper 
represents  the  death  of  Christ  not  as  a  mere  drama,  remote  from 
us,  but  as  a  death  on  our  behalf.  In  the  Supper  we  do  not  merely 
witness  the  breaking  of  the  bread  and  the  pouring  out  of  the  wine; 
we  partake  of  the  bread  and  wine  ourselves.  Plainly  the  symbolism 
means  that  we  who  are  disciples  of  Christ  do  not  merely  admire  the 
holy  self-sacrifice  of  Christ,  but  rather  receive  the  benefits  of  it. 
We  feed  upon  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  high  spiritual 
sense  that  by  faith  we  obtain  from  Christ's  death  pardon  for  our 
sins  and  a  fresh  start  in  the  full  favor  of  God.  These  benefits  we 
obtain  not  by  our  own  efforts,  but  by  a  free  gift.  It  was  Christ 
himself  who  broke  the  bread  and  poured  out  the  wine  on  the  last 
evening  before  the  crucifixion;  it  is  also  Christ  who,  through  his 
minister,  at  every  celebration  of  the  sacrament,  is  represented  as 
offering  to  us  his  body  and  blood. 

The  Lord's  Suoper,  therefore,  is  not  merely  a  commemoration  of 
an  event  in  the  past;  it  is  also  the  symbol  of  a  present  fact.     It 


THE  WORD  AND  THE  SACRAMENTS  237 

symbolizes  the  blessed  communion  of  believers  with  one  another 
and  with  Christ. 

5.  THE  SACRAMENTS  MORE  THAN  A  PROCLAMATION  OF  THE 
GOSPEL 

So  far  we  have  considered  the  sacraments  merely  as  one  means  of 
proclaiming  the  gospel.  The  Bible  proclaims  the  gospel  in  words; 
the  sacraments  proclaim  it  in  pictures.  Even  if  that  were  all,  the 
sacraments  would  be  of  great  value.  By  these  symbolic  actions 
the  gospel  message  attains  a  new  vividness  and  definiteness. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  are 
more  than  peculiar  ways  of  making  a  vivid  presentation  of  the  gospel. 
They  were  instituted  especially  by  Christ,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  has 
connected  with  them  a  special  blessing.  The  Spirit  can  use  what 
means  he  will,  and  he  has  chosen  to  use  these.  In  the  Lord's 
Supper,  for  example,  the  Lord  is  really  present  in  the  midst  of  his 
people.  He  is  not  present,  indeed,  in  "a  corporal  and  carnal 
manner";  but  his  spiritual  presence  is  a  blessed  fact. 

The  sacraments,  therefore,  should  not  be  neglected.  In  them- 
selves, when  unaccompanied  by  faith,  they  are  valueless;  and  they 
are  not  necessary  for  salvation.  Ordinarily,  however,  they  are  a 
chosen  means  of  blessing.  When  God  wills,  other  means  can  take 
their  place,  but  under  all  ordinary  circumstances  they  are  used. 
Certainly  they  should  not  be  neglected  without  adequate  cause. 
They  have  been  provided  by  God,  and  God  is  wiser  than  men. 

The  Lord's  Supper  should  be  received  with  solemnity;  but  some- 
times young  Christians  have  perhaps  an  exaggerated  dread  of  it. 
The  error  of  the  Corinthian  Christians  should  indeed  be  carefully 
avoided;  wanton  carelessness  in  the  solemn  act  will  of  course  bring 
the  condemnation  of  God.  But  the  Supper  does  not  demand  per- 
fection, even  in  faith;  on  the  contrary  it  is  intended  to  help  to 
remove  imperfection.  The  Lord's  Supper  is  not  a  dangerous  bit 
of  magic,  where  any  little  mistake  might  break  the  charm.  Let 
us  partake  of  it  with  a  simple  prayer,  and  leave  the  results  to  the 
goodness  of  God. 


In  the  Library.  —  Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  article  on 
"Lord's  Supper";  Purves,  article  on  "Baptism."  W.  W.  Moore,  "The 
Indispensable  Book."  Candlish,  "The  Christian  Sacraments"  (In 
"Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes,"  edited  by  Dods  and  Whyte).  Lilley, 
"The  Lord's  Supper." 


LESSON  XLIII 

PRAYER 


1.  THE  ANSWERER  OF  PRAYER 

The  prayers  of  the  apostolic  age  reveal  with  startling  clearness 
the  apostolic  conception  of  God;  and  one  chief  reason  why  our 
prayers  fall  short  of  the  apostolic  standard  is  that  our  idea  of  God 
is  different. 

(1)  God  Is  a  Person. — In  the  first  place,  true  prayer  always  con- 
ceives of  God  as  a  Person ;  whereas  much  of  modern  religious  think- 
ing conceives  of  him  as  only  another  name  for  the  world.  Human 
life,  it  is  said,  is  a  part  of  the  life  of  God;  every  man,  to  some  degree, 
is  divine.  Such  a  philosophy  makes  prayer  logically  impossible. 
It  is  impossible  for  us  to  speak  to  an  impersonal  world-force  of 
which  we  ourselves  are  merely  an  expression;  the  personal  distinc- 
tion between  man  and  God  is  absolutely  essential  to  prayer. 

The  transcendence  of  God  as  over  against  the  world  is  grandly 
expressed  in  the  prayer  of  the  Jerusalem  church,  which  was  studied 
in  the  Student's  Text  Book;  the  Jerusalem  Christians  addressed 
God  as  the  Lord  who  made  "the  heaven  and  the  earth  and  the  sea, 
and  all  that  in  them  is."  Acts  4  :  24.  God,  in  other  words,  is  not 
another  name  for  the  world,  but  Creator  of  the  world.  He  is  indeed 
present  in  the  world;  not  a  single  thing  that  happens  is  independent 
of  him;  the  world  would  not  continue  for  a  moment  without  God's 
sustaining  hand.  But  that  means,  not  that  God  is  identical  with 
the  world,  but  that  he  is  Master  of  it.  God  pervades  all  things; 
he  is  present  everywhere;  but  he  is  also  free. 

That  conception  pervades  all  the  prayers  of  the  apostolic  Church; 
in  all  of  them  man  comes  to  God  as  one  person  to  another.  God 
is  free;  God  can  do  what  he  will;  through  Christ  he  is  our  Father. 
He  is  not  bound  by  his  own  works;  he  is  independent  of  nature;  he 
will  overrule  all  things  for  the  good  of  his  children.  Such  is  the  God 
that  can  answer  prayer. 

(2)  God  Is  an  Infinite  and  Holy  Person. — If,  however,  the  prayers 
of  the  apostolic  age  conceive  of  God  as  a  Person,  they  also 
conceive  of  him  as  very    different  from  men.     Here,   also,   they 

238 


PRAYER  239 

provide  a  salutary  example  for  the  modern  Church.  Many  devout 
Christians  of  to-day,  in  avoiding  the  error  which  has  just  been 
described,  in  thinking  of  God  plainly  as  a  person,  are  inclined  to 
fall  into  the  opposite  mistake.  In  their  clear  realization  of  God  as  a 
person  they  think  of  him  as  a  person  exactly  like  ourselves.  They 
regard  the  difference  between  God  and  man  as  a  difference  of  degree 
rather  than  a  difference  of  kind;  they  think  of  God  as  merely  a 
greater  man  in  the  sky.  The  result  of  such  thinking  is  disastrous 
for  prayer.  Prayer,  to  be  sure,  is  here  not  absolutely  destroyed; 
communion  with  God  remains  possible;  but  such  communion  is 
degraded.  Communion  loses  that  sense  of  mystery  and  awe  which 
properly  belongs  to  it.  Man  becomes  too  familiar  with  God;  God 
takes  merely  the  leading  place  in  a  circle  of  friends;  religion  descends 
to  the  plane  of  other  relationships.  Prayer  to  such  a  God  is  apt 
to  become  irreverent.  If  our  prayers  are  to  lift  us  fully  into  the 
presence  of  God  they  must  never  lie  on  the  same  plane  with  the 
communion  that  we  enjoy  with  our  fellow  men,  but  must  be  filled 
with  a  profound  sense  of  God's  majesty  and  power. 

The  danger  of  permitting  prayer,  on  account  of  its  very  privilege, 
to  become  a  commonplace  thing  is  one  that  threatens  us  all.  It 
may  be  overcome,  however,  in  the  first  place,  by  the  contemplation 
of  nature.  "The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God ;  and  the  firmament 
showeth  his  handiwork" — and  it  is  a  terrible,  mysterious  God  that 
they  reveal.  The  stupendous  vastness  of  the  universe  and  the 
baffling  mystery  of  the  surrounding  infinity  oppress  the  thoughtful 
mind  with  a  profound  sense  of  insignificance.  And  God  is  the 
Maker  and  Ruler  of  it  all,  the  One  in  whom  all  the  mystery  finds 
its  explanation!  Such  is  the  employment  of  nature  in  the  prayer  of 
the  Jerusalem  church.     Acts  4  :  24. 

All  the  prayers  of  the  apostolic  Church  illustrate  the  principle 
which  is  now  being  emphasized.  There  is  never  anything  trite  or 
vulgar  about  the  prayers  that  are  contained  in  the  New  Testament; 
they  are  all  characterized  by  a  wonderful  dignity  and  reverence. 

If  the  infinity  and  omnipotence  of  God  should  prevent  any  ir- 
reverence in  our  prayers,  the  thought  of  his  holiness  is  perhaps  even 
more  overwhelming.  We  are  full  of  impurity.  Who  can  stand 
before  the  white  light  of  God's  awful  judgment  throne? 

(3)  God  Is  a  Gracious  Person. — Nevertheless,  despite  the  majesty 
and  holiness  of  God,  he  invites  us  into  his  presence.  It  is  a 
stupendous  wonder.  No  reasoning  could  have  shown  it  to  be 
probable;  only  ignorance  can  regard  it  as  a  matter  of  course.     If 


240  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

God  were  only  a  somewhat  greater  man,  there  would  have  been 
comparatively  little  mystery  in  prayer;  but  communion  with  the 
infinite  and  eternal  and  holy  One,  the  unfathomed  cause  of  all 
things,  is  the  wonder  of  wonders.  It  is  a  wonder  of  God's 
grace.  It  is  too  wonderful  to  be  true;  yet  it  has  become  true  in 
Christ.  True  prayer  brings  us  not  before  some  God  of  our  own 
devising,  before  whom  we  could  stand  in  our  own  merit  without 
fear,  but  into  the  dread  presence  of  Jehovah.  Let  us  not  hesitate 
to  go ;  God  has  called  us ;  he  loves  us  as  a  Father,  far  more  than  we 
can  ever  love  him.  Prayer  is  full  of  joy;  the  joy  is  so  great  that  it 
is  akin  to  fear. 

2.    THE    INFLUENCE    OF    JESUS'    TEACHING    UPON    THE 
PRAYERS  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH 

In  studying  the  prayers  of  the  apostolic  age,  it  must  always  be 
remembered  that  they  stood  upon  the  foundation  of  Jesus'  example 
and  precept. 

(1)  The  Example  of  Jesus. — With  all  his  power  and  holiness  Jesus 
was  not  above  asking  for  strength  to  perform  his  gracious  work; 
after  that  long,  wearying  day  in  Capernaum  he  "departed  into  a 
desert  place,  and  there  prayed."  Mark  1  :  35.  In  the  hour  of 
agony  in  Gethsemane,  he  prayed  a  truly  human,  though  holy, 
prayer:  "Abba,  Father,  all  things  are  possible  unto  thee;  remove 
this  cup  from  me:  howbeit  not  what  I  will,  but  what  thou  wilt." 
Ch.  14  :  36.  Prayer,  moreover,  was  not  something  which  Jesus 
reserved  for  himself ;  clearly  it  was  a  privilege  which  he  extended  to 
all  his  disciples.  In  the  prayer  that  he  taught  his  disciples,  he 
summed  up  all  that  our  prayer  should  be.     Matt.  6  :  9-15. 

(2)  God  as  Father. — One  thing  in  particular  was  derived  by  the 
apostolic  Church  from  Jesus — the  conception  of  God  as  Father. 
This  conception  appears  in  the  epistles  of  Paul  as  a  matter  of  course; 
evidently  it  was  firmly  established  among  the  readers;  it  no  longer 
required  defense  or  explanation.  Yet  it  had  not  lost,  through  long 
repetition,  one  whit  of  its  freshness;  in  Paul  it  is  never  a  mere  phrase, 
but  always  a  profound  spiritual  fact. 

Obviously  this  idea  of  the  fatherhood  of  God  was  of  particular 
importance  for  prayer.  It  taught  the  disciples  "to  draw  near  to 
God  with  all  holy  reverence  and  confidence,  as  children  to  a  father, 
able  and  ready  to  help"  them.  A  characteristic  way  of  addressing 
God  even  in  the  Gentile  churches  of  Paul  was  "Abba,  Father." 
Gal.  4:6;   Rom.  8  :  15.     The  Aramaic  word  "Abba"  is  sufficient 


PRAYER  241 

to  show  that  this  hallowed  usage  was  based  ultimately  upon  the 
teaching  and  example  of  Jesus;  the  word  was  the  very  one  that 
Jesus  had  used  both  in  his  own  prayers,  for  example  in  Gethsemane, 
Mark  14  :  36,  and  in  the  "Lord's  Prayer"  which  he  taught  to  his 
disciples. 

(3)  The  Right  of  Sonship. — What  needs  to  be  observed  especially, 
however,  is  that  the  right  of  addressing  God  as  "our  Father"  was 
not  in  the  apostolic  Church  extended  to  all  men.  Certainly  no 
justification  for  such  an  extension  could  have  been  found  in  the 
teaching  of  Jesus;  it  was  not  the  unbelieving  multitude,  but  his 
own  disciples,  to  whom  Jesus  taught  the  Lord's  Prayer.  Matt. 
5:1;  6:9;  Luke  11:1,2.  Paul  is  even  more  explicit ;  the  cry  "Abba, 
Father"  was  to  him  a  proof  that  a  great  change  had  taken  place, 
that  those  who  had  been  formerly  under  bondage  to  the  world 
had  now  become  sons  of  God.  This  change  Paul  represents 
especially  under  the  figure  of  adoption,  Gal.  4:5;  men  have  to  be 
adopted  by  God  before  they  can  call  God  Father ;  and  adoption  is 
accomplished  only  by  the  work  of  Christ.     Vs.  4,5. 

(4)  The  Intercession  of  the  Spirit. — The  cry,  "Abba,  Father"  can 
never  be  uttered  by  sinful  man  alone,  but  only  by  the  power  of 
Christ's  Spirit.  The  prayers  even  of  the  redeemed  are  faulty. 
But  the  Holy  Spirit  takes  up  their  cry.  "And  in  like  manner  the 
Spirit  also  helpeth  our  infirmity:  for  we  know  not  how  to  pray  as  we 
ought;  but  the  Spirit  himself  maketh  intercession  for  us  with 
groanings  which  cannot  be  uttered;  and  he  that  searcheth  the 
hearts  knoweth  what  is  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  because  he  maketh 
intercession  for  the  saints  according  to  the  will  of  God."  Rom. 
8  :  26,  27. 

There  lies  the  true  ground  of  confidence  in  prayer.  Prayer  does 
not  derive  its  efficacy  from  any  merit  of  its  own,  but  only  from  the 
goodness  of  God.  Let  us  not  worry  too  much  as  to  whether  our 
prayers  are  good  or  bad;  let  them  only  be  simple  and  sincere;  God 
knows  our  weakness;  his  Spirit  will  make  intercession  for  us  far 
better  than  we  can  intercede  for  ourselves. 

3.  PUBLIC  PRAYERS  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH 

The  few  individual  prayers  that  have  been  preserved  from  the 
apostolic  age  are  for  the  most  part  prayers  of  a  more  or  less  public 
character.  The  spontaneous  outpourings  of  the  hearts  of  individual 
saints  before  God  would  usually  not  be  put  into  writing;  the  full 
secrets  of  the  prayer  closet  are  known  to  God  alone. 
Sen.  t.  m.  4. 


242  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(1)  Spontaneity  and  Sincerity. — Nevertheless,  the  public  character 
of  the  prayers  of  the  New  Testament  does  not  mean  that  they  are 
cold  and  formal.  On  the  contrary,  at  a  time  when  set  liturgies  had 
not  yet  been  formed,  public  prayer  possessed  all  the  spontaneity 
of  more  private  devotions;  the  thought  of  the  listening  congregation 
or  of  a  circle  of  readers  did  not  bring  any  hampering  restraint. 
There  is  a  sterling  sincerity  about  all  the  prayers  or  fragments  of 
prayers  in  the  New  Testament. 

(2)  Dignity. — The  spontaneity  and  sincerity  of  the  prayers,  how- 
ever, did  not  involve  any  sacrifice  of  dignity.  The  prayer  of  the 
Jerusalem  congregation,  Acts  4  :  24-30,  is  a  marvel  of  exalted  speech ; 
its  employment  of  Scripture  phrase  is  an  admirable  example  for 
public  prayers  of  all  ages.  That  prayer  received  a  glorious  answer; 
indeed  the  true  prayer  of  the  congregation  never  remains  unheard. 
Christ's  promise  is  always  fulfilled ;  where  two  or  three  are  gathered 
together  in  his  name  there  is  he  in  the  midst  of  them. 

In  the  epistles,  there  is  to  be  found  here  and  there  what  may  be 
called,  if  not  the  beginning  of  liturgy,  at  any  rate  material  of  which  a 
magnificent  liturgy  can  be  formed.  The  benediction  of  Heb.  13  : 
20,  21,  for  example,  is  characterized  by  a  splendid  rhythm  as  well 
as  by  true  evangelical  fervor.  Such  a  prayer  lifts  the  hearts  of  the 
congregation  up  into  the  presence  of  God.  There  is  use  for  beauty, 
even  in  prayer;  and  the  truest  beauty  is  to  be  found  in  the  prayers 
of  the  Bible. 

4.  PRIVATE  PRAYERS  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH 

The  apostolic  guidance  in  prayer  extends  even  to  those  private 
prayers  which  no  one  hears  except  God.  In  this  field,  the  epistles 
of  Paul  are  of  special  value.  More  fully  than  any  other  one  man  of 
the  apostolic  age,  Paul  has  revealed  the  very  secrets  of  Christian 
experience ;  and  that  experience  is  rooted  in  prayer.  A  glance  at  the 
beginnings  and  endings  of  the  epistles  will  be  sufficient  to  show  how 
fundamental  prayer  was  in  Paul's  life;  news  of  the  churches  was 
never  received  without  issuing  at  once  in  thanksgiving  or  in  in- 
tercession, and  Paul  desires,  not  merely  the  good  wishes,  but  the 
prayers,  of  his  beloved  converts.  Paul  practiced  what  he  preached 
when  he  urged  the  Thessalonian  Christians  to  "pray  without 
ceasing."  I  Thess.  5  :  17.  Compare  chs.  1:3;  2  :  13;  Rom.  1:9; 
II  Tim.  1  :  3.  Evidently,  moreover,  he  regarded  prayer  as  some- 
thing far  more  than  an  incidental  expression  of  the  Christian  life; 
he  believed  in  its  real  efficacy  with  the  Ruler  of  the  world. 


PRAYER  243 

5.  "MY  POWER  IS  MADE  PERFECT  IN  WEAKNESS" 

One  passage,  particularly,  will  repay  special  study.  In  II  Cor. 
12  :  8,  9,  we  have  information  about  the  most  intimate,  the  most 
personal  of  the  prayers  of  Paul.  The  apostle  had  been  afflicted  with 
a  persistent  illness;  it  had  apparently  hampered  him  in  his  work, 
and  caused  him  acute  distress.  In  his  trouble  he  called  upon  the 
Lord;  and  by  that  prayer  Paul's  affliction  has  been  made  to  redound 
to  the  lasting  instruction  and  encouragement  of  the  Church. 

(1)  Prayer  Concerning  Physical  Ills. — In  the  first  place,  the  prayer 
concerns  not  spiritual  matters,  or  the  needs  of  the  Church  at  large, 
but  a  simple  affair  of  the  physical  life.  As  life  is  constituted  here 
on  earth,  we  are  intimately  connected  with  the  physical  world;  the 
body  is  necessary  to  the  soul.  But  God  is  Master  of  earth  as  well 
as  of  heaven;  even  the  simplest  needs  of  life  may  be  laid  before  him 
in  prayer.  To  teach  us  that,  we  have  here  the  example  of  Paul, 
as  well  as  the  precept  of  the  Saviour  himself. 

(2)  The  Answer. — In  the  second  place,  the  prayer  was  answered, 
and  answered  in  a  very  instructive  way.  The  illness  was  not 
removed;  but  it  was  made  an  instrument  of  blessing.  The  purpose 
of  it  was  revealed:  "My  power,"  said  Christ,  "is  made  perfect  in 
weakness."  Physical  suffering  is  worth  while  if  it  leads  to  heroism 
and  faith.  Such  is  often  the  Lord's  will.  He  himself  trod  the  path 
of  suffering  before  us,  and  in  his  case  as  in  ours,  the  path  led  to  glory. 

(3)  The  Prayer  Addressed  to  Christ. — In  the  third  place,  this 
prayer  was  addressed,  not  to  God  the  Father,  but  to  Christ.  Com- 
pare Acts  7  :  59,  60.  Without  doubt  "the  Lord"  in  II  Cor.  12  :  8, 
as  practically  always  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  refers  to  Christ. 
Usually,  in  the  New  Testament,  prayer  is  addressed,  through 
Christ,  to  God  the  Father ;  but  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not 
be  addressed  to  the  Son.  The  Son  as  well  as  the  Father  is  a  living 
Person;  and  the  Son  as  well  as  the  Father  is  God.  It  is  well  that 
we  have  apostolic  examples  for  prayer  addressed  directly  to  the 
Saviour.  Christ,  to  Paul,  was  no  mere  instrument  in  salvation, 
that  had  served  its  purpose  and  was  then  removed;  he  was  alive 
and  sovereign,  and  the  relation  to  him  was  a  relation  of  love.  In  a 
time  of  acute  physical  distress,  Paul  turned  to  the  Saviour.  Three 
times  he  called,  and  then  the  answer  came.  The  answer  will  always 
come  in  the  Lord's  way,  not  in  ours;  but  the  Lord's  way  is  always  best. 


In  the  Library. — Hastings,    "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":   Bernard, 
article  on  "Prayer"  (III).     "Thomas,  "The  Prayers  of  St.  Paul." 


LESSON  XLIV 
THE  CONGREGATION 


1.  CONGREGATIONAL  MEETINGS  IN  PALESTINE 

In  studying  the  congregational  meetings  of  the  apostolic  churches 
it  must  be  remembered  that  the  Christian  community  in  Jerusalem 
continued  for  many  years  its  participation  in  the  worship  of  temple 
and  synagogue.  Specially  Christian  meetings,  therefore,  were  at 
first  not  the  sole  expression  of  the  collective  worship  of  the  Jerusalem 
Christians.  Nevertheless,  such  meetings  were  undoubtedly  held, 
even  from  the  beginning.  From  the  days  when  the  one  hundred 
and  twenty  brethren  were  gathered  together  before  Pentecost,  the 
Church  was  not  without  some  outward  expression  of  its  distinctive 
life. 

(1)  As  Indicated  in  The  Acts. — The  circumstances  of  such  early 
meetings  of  the  congregation  are,  however,  obscure.  The  very 
considerable  numbers  of  the  converts,  Acts  2  :  41,  47;  4  : 4;  5  :  14, 
would  perhaps  sometimes  make  it  difficult  to  gather  the  whole 
congregation  together  in  one  place ;  if,  however,  that  were  done,  it 
would  perhaps  be  usually  in  some  part  of  the  temple  area.  There 
seem  to  have  been  general  meetings — for  example,  Acts  15  : 1-29 — 
but  it  is  perhaps  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  they  included 
every  individual  member  of  the  Jerusalem  church. 

Certainly,  however,  no  members  of  that  first  Christian  community 
neglected  the  assembling  of  themselves  together.  Evidently  the 
sense  of  brotherhood  was  strongly  developed,  and  evidently  it  ex- 
pressed itself  not  only  in  the  regular  relief  of  the  needy,  Acts  6:1, 
but  also  in  meetings  for  instruction  and  worship  and  prayer. 
Ch.  2  :42;  4  :  23-31.  These  meetings  were  only  outward  indica- 
tions of  a  wonderful  unity  of  mind  and  heart.  Ch.  4  :  32.  The 
cause  of  that  unity  was  the  common  possession  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 

As  might  have  been  expected  in  a  book  which  is  interested  chiefly 
in  the  outward  extension  of  the  kingdom,  the  book  of  The  Acts  gives 
us  little  detailed  information  about  the  conduct  of  these  earliest 
Christian  meetings.  Probably,  however,  the  example  of  the  Jewish 
synagogue  made  itself  strongly  felt.     There  was  no  violent  break 

244 


THE  CONGREGATION  245 

with  Judaism;  a  new  spirit  was  infused  into  ancient  forms.  The 
resemblance  between  the  synagogue  service  and  even  the  fully 
developed  Christian  meetings  of  to-day  was  noted  in  connection 
with  Lesson  IV. 

(2)  As  Indicated  in  the  Epistle  of  James. — The  Epistle  of  James 
perhaps  helps  somewhat  to  supply  the  need  of  detailed  information. 
That  epistle,  as  was  observed  in  Lesson  XXXII,  was  written  by  the 
head  of  the  Jerusalem  Church,  and  probably  to  Jewish  Christians 
before  A.  D.  49.  Apparently,  therefore,  we  have  in  James  2  :  1-6 
some  welcome  information  about  Christian  assemblies,  if  not  in 
Jerusalem,  at  least  in  other  Jewish  Christian  churches.  In  v.  2, 
the  word  "synagogue"  is  applied  to  the  meeting  which  is  described, 
but  that  word  in  Greek  means  simply  "gathering  together" — almost 
the  same  word  is  used  in  Heb.  10  :  25.  The  use  of  the  word  by 
James  shows  simply  that  at  that  early  time  "synagogue"  had  not 
become  purely  a  technical  designation  of  a  non-Christian  Jewish 
assembly. 

So  interpreted,  the  passage  in  James  indicates — what  might  in- 
deed have  been  expected — that  the  early  Christian  meetings  were 
not  always  perfect.  A  Pharisaical  habit  of  respect  of  persons  and 
desire  for  the  chief  seats  had  crept  even  into  the  Church.  If 
similar  faults  appear  in  modern  times,  we  should  not  despair,  but 
should  fight  against  them  in  the  spirit  of  James. 

2.  CONGREGATIONAL  MEETINGS  IN  THE  PAULINE  CHURCHES 

With  regard  to  the  Pauline  churches  information  about  the 
conduct  of  religious  services  is  far  more  abundant  than  it  is  with 
regard  to  the  churches  of  Palestine;  for  we  have  here  the  inestimable 
assistance  of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  The  First  Epistle  to  the  Co- 
rinthians, especially,  is  a  mine  of  information;  but  much  can  also  be 
learned  elsewhere. 

(1)  The  Place  of  Meeting. — From  The  Acts  it  appears  that  Paul 
regularly  began  his  work  in  any  city  by  preaching  in  the  Jewish 
synagogue,  but  that  the  opposition  of  the  Jews  soon  made  it 
necessary  to  find  another  meeting  place.  Often,  a  private  house, 
belonging  to  one  of  the  converts,  served  the  purpose.  Rom.  16  :  23; 
I  Cor.  16  :  19;  Col.  4  :  15;  Philem.  2.  Sometimes  there  seem  to 
have  been  a  number  of  such  house-churches  in  the  same  city;  yet 
common  meetings  of  all  the  Christians  of  the  city  seem  also  to  be 
presupposed.  In  Ephesus  Paul  used  for  his  evangelistic  work  a 
building  or  a  room  belonging  to  a  certain  Tyrannus,  who  was 


246  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

probably  a  rhetorician.     The  erection  of  buildings  especially  for 
Christian  use  belongs  of  course  to  a  considerably  later  time. 

(2)  The  Time  of  Meeting. — The  frequency  of  the  meetings  does 
not  appear,  and  may  well  have  varied  according  to  circumstances. 
There  is  some  indication,  however,  that  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
the  present  Sunday,  was  especially  singled  out  for  religious  services. 
I  Cor.  16:  2;  Acts  20  :  7.  The  same  day  is  apparently  called  "the 
Lord's  day"  in  Rev.  1  :  10. 

(3)  Temporary  Gifts  of  the  Spirit. — In  the  actual  conduct  of  the 
meetings,  some  features  appear  which  are  not  to  be  observed 
in  the  modern  Church.  A  number  of  the  gifts  discussed  in  I  Cor., 
chs.  12  to  14 — for  example,  miracles,  speaking  with  tongues,  the 
interpretation  of  tongues,  and  prophecy  in  the  strict  sense — have 
become  extinct.  The  cessation  of  them  need  cause  no  wonder;  the 
apostolic  age  was  a  time  of  beginnings,  when  the  Church  was  being 
established  by  the  immediate  exercise  of  the  power  of  God ;-  it  is  no 
wonder  that  at  such  a  time  the  Spirit  manifested  himself  as  he  did 
not  in  later  generations.  There  is  a  fundamental  difference  be- 
tween the  apostolic  age  and  all  subsequent  periods  in  the  history 
of  the  Church. 

Nevertheless,  all  the  essential  features  of  our  modern  church 
services  were  present  from  the  earliest  time  about  which  we  have 
detailed  information.  The  example  of  the  apostles  is  here  very 
explicit. 

(4)  Scripture-Reading. — In  the  first  place,  the  Pauline  churches 
certainly  practiced  the  reading  of  the  Bible.  That  would  be  proved 
sufficiently  by  the  evident  familiarity  of  the  Christians  with  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures;  for  in  those  days  such  familiarity  would 
undoubtedly  be  received  in  large  measure  by  having  the  Bible  read 
aloud.  The  example  of  the  synagogue  would  also  have  its  influence. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  some  even  of  the  Gentile  converts  were 
familiar  with  the  synagogue  service  before  they  became  Christians. 
But  there  is  also  the  explicit  testimony  of  I  Thess.  5  :  27,  Col.  4  :  16. 
There  the  reading  of  Pauline  Epistles  is  specifically  enjoined.  The 
Apocalypse  also  was  clearly  intended  to  be  read  aloud.  Rev.  1:3; 
22  :  18. 

(5)  Preaching. — In  the  second  place,  there  was  preaching.  No 
doubt  this  part  of  the  service  often  took  a  somewhat  different  form 
from  that  which  it  assumes  to-day.  Prophecy,  for  example,  was  a 
kind  of  preaching  which  has  been  discontinued.  The  exercise  of 
the  gift  of  "teaching"  perhaps  corresponded  more  closely  to  the 


THE  CONGREGATION  247 

sermons  of  the  present  day;  certainly  an  exposition  of  the  Scripture 
passages  read  would  have  been  according  to  the  analogy  of  the 
Jewish  synagogue.  At  any  rate,  in  some  form  or  other,  there  was 
certainly  instruction  in  the  Scriptures  and  in  the  gospel,  and 
exhortation  based  upon  that  instruction. 

(6)  Prayer. — In  the  third  place,  there  was  prayer;  directions  for 
public  prayer  are  given  at  some  length  in  I  Tim.,  ch.  2;  and  there 
are  indications  that  prayer  was  practiced  also  in  the  meetings  of 
the  Corinthian  church.     See  for  example,  I  Cor.  11  : 4,  5. 

(7)  Singing. — In  the  fourth  place,  there  was  probably  singing, 
though  the  direct  information  about  this  part  of  the  service  is  slight. 
See,  for  example,  I  Cor.  14  :  26.  Certainly  no  elaborate  argument  is 
necessary  in  order  to  exhibit  the  Scripture  warrant  for  singing  in  the 
worship  of  God.  Psalms  were  sung  in  Old  Testament  times  to  an 
instrumental  accompaniment,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  the 
customs  of  the  Church  were  changed  in  this  respect  under  the  new 
dispensation.  Indeed,  if  singing  is  an  expression  of  joy,  it  would 
seem  to  be  especially  in  place  after  the  fulfillment  of  the  promises 
has  come. 

3.    PAUL'S   DIRECTIONS    FOR   CONGREGATIONAL    MEETINGS 

Two  features  balance  each  other  in  Paul's  directions  for  the  public 
worship  of  the  Corinthian  church. 

(1)  The  Principle  of  Freedom. — In  the  first  place  he  is  in  full 
sympathy  with  the  freedom  and  informality  that  prevailed.  There 
seem  to  have  been  no  set  speakers  in  Corinth ;  every  man  spoke  as 
the  spirit  gave  him  utterance;  the  service  must  have  been  charac- 
terized by  great  variety.  This  variety,  Paul  says,  is  not  disturb- 
ing, because  it  finds  its  higher  unity  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  "There  are 
diversities  of  gifts,  but  the  same  Spirit."     I  Cor.  12:4. 

(2)  The  Principle  of  Dignity. — In  the  second  place,  however, 
Paul  has  a  strong  sense  of  dignity.  The  enthusiastic  expression  of 
religious  feeling  must  not  degenerate  into  anything  like  a  senseless 
orgy;  spiritual  gifts,  however  exalted,  are  not  independent  of  reason. 
"The  spirits  of  the  prophets  are  subject  to  the  prophets;  for  God 
is  not  a  God  of  confusion,  but  of  peace."  I  Cor.  14  :  32,  33. 
"Let  all  things  be  done  decently  and  in  order."     V.  40. 

Dignity  was  to  be  preserved,  moreover,  not  merely  in  the  ordering 
of  the  service  itself,  but  also  in  the  dress  and  behavior  of  those  who 
took  part.  So  much  at  least  is  clear  in  the  difficult  passage,  ch. 
11  : 2-16.     Apparently   the   full   equality   which   was   granted   to 


248  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

women  in  the  Christian  life  led  the  women  of  the  Corinthian  con- 
gregation to  give  a  kind  of  expression  to  their  freedom  which  at 
least  at  that  time  was  not  seemly.  Paul  detected  the  danger  and 
guarded  against  it.  The  lesson  always  needs  to  be  learned.  How- 
ever dignity  may  be  preserved  in  detail,  in  any  particular  country 
and  at  any  particular  time,  the  principle  itself  should  always  be 
borne  in  mind  exactly  as  Paul  enunciated  it. 

At  a  later  period  in  the  apostolic  age,  the  sense  of  dignity  seems 
to  have  found  expression  in  a  quieter  sort  of  religious  service  than 
that  which  prevailed  at  the  time  of  First  Corinthians.  The  First 
Epistle  to  Timothy  lays  great  stress  upon  sobriety  and  gravity  in 
various  departments  of  the  life  of  the  Church. 

(3)  The  Principle  of  Love. — These  two  principles — the  principle 
of  freedom  and  the  principle  of  dignity — are  kept  each  in  its  own 
proper  place  only  when  they  are  submitted  to  the  governance  of  a 
higher  principle.  That  higher  principle  is  love.  The  ultimate  aim 
of  congregational  meetings,  according  to  Paul,  is  not  the  benefit  of 
the  individual,  but  the  edification  of  the  whole  body,  and  of  the 
stranger  who  may  come  in.  The  man  who  has  the  principle  of 
Christian  love  in  his  heart,  as  it  is  grandly  described  in  I  Cor., 
ch.  13,  will  never  push  himself  forward  in  the  congregation  in  such 
a  way  as  to  display  his  own  spiritual  gifts  at  the  expense  of  others. 
On  the  other  hand,  he  will  not  be  inclined  to  check  the  operations 
of  the  Spirit;  it  is  the  Spirit  alone  who  can  convert  the  stranger,  it 
is  the  Spirit  alone  who  can  build  up  Christian  people  in  the  life  of 
faith  and  hope  and  love. 

The  principle  of  love  is  often  neglected  in  the  modern  Church. 
People  say  they  will  not  go  to  church  because  they  get  nothing  out 
of  it.  No  doubt  they  are  mistaken;  no  doubt  if  they  did  go,  the 
benefit  would  appear  clearly  in  the  long  run  in  their  own  lives. 
But  at  any  rate  they  have  ignored  the  highest  motive  altogether. 
We  should  go  to  church  not  only  to  obtain  benefit  for  ourselves,  but 
also,  and  especially,  to  benefit  our  brethren  by  joining  with  them  in 
worship,  in  prayer  and  in  instruction. 


In  the  Library. — Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible";  Gayford, 
article  on  "Church";  Adeney,  article  on  "Worship  (in  N.T.)."  Char- 
teris,  "The  Church  of  Christ,"  pp.  44-90. 


LESSON  XLV 
THE  RELIEF  OF  THE  NEEDY 


In  the  Student's  Text  Book,  special  emphasis  was  laid  upon  the 
relief  of  the  needy  as  it  was  practiced  in  the  Jerusalem  church. 
Here  it  may  be  well  to  supplement  what  was  there  said  by  a  some- 
what more  detailed  treatment  of  the  great  collection  that  was 
undertaken  by  Paul.  The  exposition  will  serve  to  illustrate  the 
apostolic  principles  of  Christian  giving. 

1.  THE  PAULINE  COLLECTION  ACCORDING  TO  FIRST 
CORINTHIANS 

(1)  The  Beginning  in  Galatia  and  in  Corinth. — Writing  from 
Ephesus  during  his  long  stay  in  that  city,  Acts  19  :  1  to  20  :  1, 
Paul  tells  the  Corinthians  that  he  had  already  given  directions  about 
the  collection  to  the  churches  of  Galatia,  I  Cor.  16:1;  he  had 
probably  done  so  either  during  the  second  visit  to  Galatia,  Acts 
18  :  23,  or  by  letter  after  his  arrival  at  Ephesus.  Now,  at  any  rate, 
he  asks  the  Corinthians — very  simply  and  briefly,  and  evidently 
presupposing  previous  information  on  the  part  of  his  readers — to 
prosecute  the  collection  during  his  absence  in  order  that  when  he 
should  arrive  at  Corinth  everything  might  be  ready. 

(2)  Laying  in  Store  on  the  First  Day  of  the  Week. — The  manner  in 
which  the  collection  was  to  be  managed  is  exceedingly  interesting. 
"Upon  the  first  day  of  the  week,"  Paul  says,  "let  each  one  of  you 
lay  by  him  in  store,  as  he  may  prosper."  I  Cor.  16  :  2.  Apparently 
no  permanent  church  treasury  was  used  for  the  reception  of  the 
gifts,  every  man  was  to  save  his  own  money  at  home,  very  much  as 
private  collection  barrels  are  used  to-day.  The  laying  up  of  the 
money,  however,  was  to  take  place  on  the  first  day  of  the  week; 
we  have  here  probably  an  early  trace  of  the  Christian  Sabbath. 
Perhaps  we  may  conclude  that  the  act  of  giving  was  regarded  as  a 
part  of  religious  worship.  Such  a  conclusion  is  at  any  rate  in 
thorough  harmony  with  all  that  Paul  says  about  the  collection. 
Some  people  seem  to  feel  that  the  taking  of  an  offering  rather  mars 
the  dignity  of  a  church  service.     In  reality  it  has  that  effect  only  if 

249 


250  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

it  is  executed  in  the  wrong  spirit.     Christian  giving  is  treated  by 
Paul  as  a  legitimate  part  of  the  worship  of  God. 

(3)  The  Delegates  of  the  Corinthian  Church. — When  Paul  should 
arrive  at  Corinth,  he  was  to  receive  the  collection  and  either  send 
or  take  it  to  Jerusalem  by  the  help  of  delegates  whom  the  Co- 
rinthians themselves  should  choose.  The  purpose  of  choosing  these 
delegates  appears  more  plainly  in  Second  Corinthians. 

2.  THE  PAULINE  COLLECTION  ACCORDING  TO  SECOND 
CORINTHIANS 

(1)  The  Situation. — After  the  writing  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  there  had  followed  a  period  of  serious  estrangement 
between  Paul  and  the  Corinthian  church.  Naturally  enough  the 
collection  suffered  during  this  period,  as  did  other  Christian  ac- 
tivities. At  the  time  of  Second  Corinthians,  perhaps  about  a  year 
after  the  first  letter  had  been  written,  Paul  was  obliged  to  remind  his 
readers  that  although  they  had  begun  the  work  the  year  before, 
much  remained  still  to  be  done.  II  Cor.  8  :  10;  9  :  2.  Neverthe- 
less, Titus,  during  his  recent  visit  to  Corinth,  when  the  repentance 
of  the  church  had  become  manifest,  had  apparently  been  able  to 
take  the  matter  again  in  hand.  Such  seems  to  be  the  most  probable 
interpretation  of  ch.  8  :  6;  12  :  18.  If  Titus  did  take  up  the  matter 
on  the  very  visit  when  the  rebellion  against  Paul  had  been  only  with 
difficulty  quelled,  that  is  a  striking  indication  of  the  importance 
which  Paul  and  his  associates  attributed  to  the  collection.  It  was 
not  a  matter  that  could  wait  until  some  convenient  season;  it  had 
to  be  taken  in  hand  vigorously,  even  perhaps  at  the  risk  of  mis- 
understanding and  suspicion,  the  very  moment  when  Paul's  relation 
to  the  church  became  again  tolerably  good. 

(2)  Courtesy  of  Paul. — Like  all  of  Paul's  management  of  money 
matters,  his  treatment  of  the  collection  is  characterized  by  ad- 
mirable delicacy  and  tact.  Instead  of  berating  the  Corinthians 
roundly  for  their  delinquency,  as  so  many  modern  organizers  would 
have  done,  he  seeks  to  win  them  over  by  worthier  methods.  He 
points,  indeed,  to  the  example  of  the  Macedonian  Christians,  in 
order  to  fire  the  zeal  of  the  Corinthians;  the  poverty  of  the  Mace- 
donian churches  had  not  stood  in  the  way  of  their  liberality;  they 
had  given  up  to  their  power  and  indeed  beyond  their  power;  they 
had  given,  not  of  compulsion,  but  willingly,  dedicating  themselves 
as  well  as  their  goods  to  the  Lord.  II  Cor.  8  :  1-5.  But  the  Co- 
rinthians are  allowed  to  draw  their  own  conclusion;  Paul  does  not 


THE  RELIEF  OF  THE  NEEDY  251 

force  it  upon  them.  He  does  not  press  the  matter  home  brutally; 
he  does  not  put  the  Corinthians  to  shame  by  expressly  pointing  out 
how  much  more  generously  the  poorer  Macedonian  Christians  had 
contributed  than  they.  Indeed  he  gives  his  readers  full  credit;  he 
courteously  calls  their  attention  to  the  fact  that  it  was  they  who  had 
made  the  beginning,  v.  10,  and  that  he  had  been  able  to  boast  of 
them  to  the  Macedonians,  so  that  their  zeal  had  stirred  up  their 
Macedonian  brethren.  Ch.  9:1,2.  He  appeals  especially  to  the 
pride  that  they  ought  to  feel  in  the  boasting  which  Paul  had  vent- 
ured upon  in  their  behalf;  Paul  had  boasted  to  the  Macedonians 
that  Achaia  had  been  prepared  for  a  year;  how  sad  an  end  it  would 
be  to  such  boasting  if  Macedonians  should  go  to  Corinth  with  Paul 
and  should  find  that  the  collection  was  not  ready  after  all!  Paul 
urges  the  Corinthians  not  to  leave  any  part  of  the  work  until  after 
his  arrival;  if  they  do,  they  will  put  both  him  and  themselves  to 
shame.     Vs.  1-5. 

With  equal  delicacy  Paul  hints  that  the  achievements  of  the 
Corinthians  in  other  directions  ought  to  be  supplemented  by  this 
grace  of  giving.  The  Corinthians,  according  to  the  first  epistle, 
had  been  very  proud  of  their  power  of  "utterance"  and  their 
"knowledge";  to  these  Paul  can  now  add — after  the  loyalty  of  the 
church  has  finally  been  established — earnestness  and  love,  II  Cor. 

8  :  6-8;  but  all  these  excellences  will  be  incomplete  unless  there  is 
also  liberality.  The  Christian  life  must  express  itself  in  the  simpler 
graces,  if  the  more  conspicuous  activities  are  to  be  of  genuine  value. 

(3)  No  Unfair  Burdens  to  Be  Borne. — The  delicacy  of  Paul's 
treatment  of  the  matter  is  observed  also  in  II  Cor.  8  :  10-15;  he  is 
careful  to  explain  that  the  Corinthians  are  not  asked  to  lay  unfair 
burdens  upon  themselves.  There  should  be  an  equality  among 
Christians;  it  is  now  time  for  the  Corinthians  to  give  rather  than  to 
receive,  but  if  circumstances  should  change  they  might  count  on  the 
aid  of  their  brethren.  Furthermore,  no  one  should  be  discouraged 
if  he  can  give  only  a  little;  "if  the  readiness  is  there,  it  is  acceptable 
according  as  a  man  hath,  not  according  as  he  hath  not." 

(4)  Cheerful  Giving. — Paul  urges  his  readers,  indeed,  to  be 
bountiful.  "He  that  soweth  sparingly  shall  reap  also  sparingly; 
and  he  that  soweth  bountifully  shall  reap  also  bountifully."    II  Cor. 

9  :  6.  But  this  bountifulness  was  to  be  secured,  not  by  pressing  out 
the  last  cent,  but  by  promoting  real  cheerfulness  in  giving.  "Let 
each  man  do  according  as  he  hath  purposed  in  his  heart:  not 
grudgingly,  or  of  necessity:  for  God  loveth  a  cheerful  giver."     The 


252  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

Pauline  method  is  wisest  in  the  end.  Men  can  seldom  be  bullied  into 
liberality ;  they  will  give  liberally  only  when  giving  becomes,  not  a 
mere  duty,  but  a  joy.  Cheerfulness  in  giving,  moreover,  possesses 
a  value  of  its  own,  quite  aside  from  the  amount  of  the  gift;  it  is  a 
true  expression  of  Christian  communion. 

(5)  The  Unity  of  the  Church. — Probably  Paul  desired  to  accom- 
plish by  the  collection  something  even  more  important  than  the 
relief  of  the  Jerusalem  poor.  Many  Palestinian  Christians — not 
only  extreme  Judaizers,  but  also  apparently  considerable  numbers 
among  the  rank  and  file — had  been  suspicious  of  the  Gentile  mission. 
Acts  21  :  20,  21.  Such  suspicions  would  be  allayed  by  deeds  more 
effectively  than  by  words;  a  generous  offering  for  the  poor  of  the 
Jerusalem  church  would  show  that  Jews  and  Gentiles  were  really 
united  in  the  bonds  of  Christian  love.     II  Cor.  9  :  12-14. 

(6)  The  Glory  of  God. — Ultimately,  however,  the  purpose  of  the 
collection,  as  of  all  other  Christian  activities,  is  to  be  found,  accord- 
ing to  Paul,  in  God.  "For  the  ministration  of  this  service  not  only 
filleth  up  the  measure  of  the  wants  of  the  saints,  but  aboundeth  also 
through  many  thanksgivings  unto  God."  The  unity  of  the  Church, 
inspiring  though  it  is,  is  desired,  not  for  its  own  sake,  but  for  the 
sake  of  the  glory  of  God.  By  the  simple  means  of  the  collection, 
Paul  hopes  to  present  a  united  Church — united  in  thanksgiving  and 
in  love — as  some  poor,  human  return  to  him  who  has  granted  us 
all  the  "unspeakable  gift"  of  salvation  through  his  Son. 

(7)  Sound  Business  Methods. — The  arrangements  which  Paul 
made  for  the  administration  of  the  gifts  are  as  instructive  in  their 
way  as  are  the  lofty  principles  that  he  applied.  In  order  to  avoid 
base  suspicions,  II  Cor.  8  :  20;  12  :  16-18,  he  determined  that 
delegates  approved  by  the  Corinthians  themselves  should  carry  the 
gifts  to  Jerusalem,  I  Cor.  16  :  3,  4,  and  secured  for  the  prosecution 
of  the  work  in  Corinth  men  who  had  the  full  indorsement  of  the 
churches.  II  Cor.  8  :  16-24.  The  lesson  is  worth  learning.  It 
will  not  do  to  be  careless  about  the  money  matters  of  the  Church; 
it  will  not  do  to  say  that  the  Church  is  above  suspicion.  Like 
Paul,  "we  take  thought  for  things  honorable,  not  only  in  the  sight 
of  the  Lord,  but  also  in  the  sight  of  men."  In  other  words,  we 
must  be  not  only  honorable  in  managing  the  money  affairs  of  the 
Church,  but  also  demonstrably  honorable.  To  that  end  sound 
business  methods  should  always  be  used.  The  accounts  of  the 
Church  should  be  audited,  not  with  less  care,  but  if  anything  with 
more  care,  than  those  of  ordinary  business  enterprises. 


THE  RELIEF  OF  THE  NEEDY  253 

3.  THE  PAULINE  COLLECTION  ACCORDING  TO  ROMANS 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  written  from  Corinth  a  little  after 
the  time  of  Second  Corinthians,  Paul  speaks  of  the  collection  again. 
Rom.  15  :  22-29,  31.  He  is  on  the  point  of  going  with  the  gifts  to 
Jerusalem,  and  asks  the  Roman  Christians  to  pray  that  the  min- 
istration of  the  Gentiles  may  be  "acceptable  to  the  saints."  There 
is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  such  prayers  were  unanswered;  Paul 
was  cordially  received  by  the  Jerusalem  Christians,  Acts  21:17-26; 
the  trouble  which  caused  his  arrest  came  from  non-Christian  Jews. 

4.  TO  WHOM  WAS  RELIEF  EXTENDED? 

(1)  Breadth  of  Christian  Sympathy. — The  relief  of  the  needy  in 
the  apostolic  Church,  as  it  has  been  studied  in  the  present  lesson, 
concerned,  not  outsiders,  but  Christian  brethren.  This  fact 
certainly  does  not  mean  that  the  early  Christians  were  narrow  in 
their  sympathies;  they  had  received  from  Jesus  the  command  to 
love  their  enemies,  and  the  command  was  reiterated  by  the  apostles. 
Rom.  12  :  20.  They  were  commanded,  furthermore,  to  "work 
that  which  is  good  toward  all  men."     Gal.  6  :  10. 

(2)  Special  Attention  to  Christian  Brethren. — There  were  reasons, 
however,  why  such  good  works  should  be  directed  "especially  to- 
ward them  that  are  of  the  household  of  the  faith." 

(a)  The  Special  Rights  of  Brethren. — In  the  first  place,  there  was 
a  general  reason,  which  applies  to  all  ages.  Though  the  Church  has 
a  duty  to  all  men,  it  has  a  special  duty  to  its  own  members;  for 
Christian  people  to  allow  their  brethren  to  starve  is  as  unnatural  as 
for  a  father  to  neglect  a  son,  or  a  husband  a  wife.  Community  in 
the  faith  does  create  a  special  bond,  which  should  make  itself  felt 
in  all  departments  of  life. 

It  should  be  observed  that  in  the  matter  of  the  collection  Paul 
takes  altogether  for  granted  the  right  of  the  poor  saints  to  the  support 
of  the  Church.  He  does  not  think  it  worth  while  to  go  into  details 
about  the  suffering  of  the  Jerusalem  poor;  he  does  not  attempt  to 
play  upon  the  sympathies  of  his  readers;  he  does  not  patronizingly 
represent  the  recipients  of  the  bounty  as  paupers.  Indeed,  the 
Jerusalem  Christians,  he  tells  the  Romans,  though  they  are  re- 
ceiving material  aid,  are  not  really  debtors,  but  rather  creditors. 
"If  the  Gentiles  have  been  made  partakers  of  their  spiritual  things, 
they  owe  it  to  them  also  to  minister  unto  them  in  carnal  things." 
Rom.  15  :  27.  This  attitude  toward  poorer  Christians  is  worthy  of 
all  emulation.     Aid  to  the  brethren  is  not  "chanty,"  in  the  degraded 


254  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

sense  which  that  fine  word  has  unfortunately  assumed,  but  a  solemn 
and  yet  joyful  duty.  It  should  never  be  undertaken  in  a  patronizing 
spirit,  but  in  a  spirit  of  love  that  multiplies  the  value  of  the  gift. 

(b)  Avoidance  of  Idleness  in  the  Church. — On  the  other  hand, 
however,  the  apostolic  Church  did  not  encourage  begging  or 
pauperism.  What  the  special  reason  was  for  the  poverty  of  the 
Jerusalem  church  we  do  not  know.  Perhaps  many  of  the  Jerusalem 
Christians  had  been  obliged  to  leave  their  homes  in  Galilee  and  in 
the  Dispersion.  At  any  rate,  we  may  assume  that  the  poverty  of  the 
church  was  not  due  to  idleness.  In  the  Thessalonian  epistles  Paul 
takes  occasion  to  warn  his  converts  against  an  idle  life;  they  are  to 
do  their  own  business  and  work  with  their  hands;  "if  any  will  not 
work,  neither  let  him  eat."  I  Thess.  4  :  10-12;  II  Thess.  3  :  6-15. 
Certainly  Paul  was  the  best  example  of  such  diligence;  despite  his 
wonderful  gifts  and  lofty  duties  he  had  made  himself  independent 
by  manual  labor.  In  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy,  moreover, 
particular  precautions  are  taken  against  allowing  the  bounty  of  the 
Church  to  be  abused.  I  Tim.  5  :  3-16.  The  treatment  of  the  poor 
in  the  apostolic  Church  exhibits  everywhere  an  admirable  com- 
bination of  common  sense  with  lofty  idealism. 

(c)  Conditions  in  the  Apostolic  Church  and  Conditions  To-day. — 
If  the  gifts  of  the  apostolic  Church  were  devoted  chiefly  to  Christian 
brethren  rather  than  to  outsiders,  that  is  no  justification  for  such 
limitation  to-day.  In  the  apostolic  age  there  were  special  reasons 
why  the  Church  could  not  often  deal  extensively  with  the  material 
needs  of  the  world  at  large.  The  Church  was  exceedingly  poor; 
many  of  the  converts  probably  suffered  serious  losses  by  the  very 
fact  of  their  being  Christians;  under  such  conditions  the  first  duty 
was  obviously  at  home.  Conditions  to-day  are  widely  different. 
The  Church  has  become  wealthy ;  she  is  well  able  to  extend  her  minis- 
trations far  and  wide.  Only  by  unlimited  breadth  of  service  will  she 
really  be  true  to  the  example  of  Jesus  and  of  his  first  disciples;  only 
by  universal  helpfulness  will  she  be  true  to  her  great  commission. 


In  The  Library. — Uhlhorn,  "Christian  Charity  in  the  Ancient 
Church."  Brace,  "Gesta  Christi,"  pp.  93-105.  Charteris,  "The 
Church  of  Christ,"  pp.  91-129. 


LESSON  XLVI 
ORGANIZING  FOR  SERVICE 


Whatever  the  organization  of  a  body  of  Christians  may  be,  the 
body  itself  is  a  true  branch  of  the  Church  if  it  consists  of  those  who 
believe  in  Christ.  Nevertheless,  if  the  Church  is  to  be  more  than 
an  aggregation  of  individuals,  if  it  is  not  only  to  be  something,  but 
also  to  do  something,  it  requires  some  sort  of  organization.  This 
fundamental  need  was  clearly  recognized  in  the  apostolic  age;  and 
it  was  met  by  certain  provisions  which  we  believe  ought  still  to  be 
followed.  These  provisions,  however,  do  not  amount  to  anything 
like  an  elaborate  constitution;  they  do  not  hinder  adaptation  to 
changing  conditions. 

1.  ELDERS  ACCORDING  TO  THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES 

In  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  which  afford  more  detailed  information 
about  organization  than  is  to  be  found  anywhere  else  in  the  New 
Testament,  the  government  of  the  local  church  is  seen  to  be  in- 
trusted to  a  body  of  "elders,"  with  whom  "deacons"  are  asso- 
ciated. No  one  of  the  elders,  so  far  as  can  be  detected,  pos- 
sessed authority  at  all  different  in  kind  from  the  authority  of 
the  others;  all  had  the  function  of  ruling;  all  were  "overseers"  or 
"bishops"  of  the  church. 

The  functions  of  the  elders  are  not  described  in  detail;  but  evi- 
dently they  had  a  general  oversight  over  the  affairs  of  the  con- 
gregation. That  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  "bishop"  as  it  is 
applied  to  them.  Some  of  them  at  least  also  labored  "in  the  word 
and  in  teaching,"  but  all  seem  to  have  been  alike  in  their  function 
of  bearing  rule. 

2.  ELDERS  ACCORDING  TO  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  FORM 
OF  GOVERNMENT 

The  similarity  of  such  an  arrangement  to  our  own  Presbyterian 
form  of  government  is  plain.  Our  churches  also  are  governed  not 
by  an  individual,  but  by  a  body  of  "elders"  who  are  equal  to  one 
another  in  authority.     Changing  conditions  have  of  course  intro- 

255 


256  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

duced  elaboration  of  the  simple  apostolic  model.  Thus  the  teach- 
ing function,  for  example,  which  in  apostolic  times  was  perhaps 
exercised  more  or  less  informally  by  those  of  the  elders  who 
possessed  the  gifts  for  it,  is  now  naturally  assigned  for  the  most 
part  to  men  who  have  received  a  special  training.  These  "teaching 
elders"  in  our  church  are  the  ministers.  Conditions  have  become 
so  complex  that  men  of  special  training,  who  devote  their  whole 
time  to  the  work  of  the  Church,  are  imperatively  required.  The 
pastors  and  teachers,  Eph.  4:11,  even  in  the  apostolic  Church, 
seem  to  have  formed  a  fairly  definite  group.  This  class  of  gifts  is 
exercised  to-day  especially  by  the  ministers,  though  similar  func- 
tions should  also  be  exercised  by  other  members  of  the  Church. 

3.  HOW  WERE  ELDERS  TO  BE  CHOSEN? 

With  regard  to  the  government  of  the  apostolic  Church  a  number 
of  interesting  questions  can  never  be  definitely  answered.  For 
example,  how  were  the  elders  to  be  chosen? 

(1)  Sometimes  Appointed  by  the  Apostles. — Such  passages  as 
Acts  14  :  23;  Titus  1  :  5,  do  not  settle  the  question.  According  to 
the  former  passage,  elders  were  appointed  in  the  churches  of  south- 
ern Galatia  by  Paul  and  Barnabas.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  authority  of  the  apostles  was  peculiar  and  temporary. 
Because  the  apostles  had  power  to  appoint  elders  it  does  not  follow 
that  any  individuals  at  a  later  time  would  possess  a  similar  power. 
The  situation,  at  the  time  of  the  first  Christian  mission,  was 
peculiar;  small  bodies  of  Christians  had  just  been  rescued  from 
heathenism;  at  first  they  would  need  a  kind  of  guidance  which  could 
afterwards  safely  be  withdrawn.  According  to  Titus  1:5,  Titus 
was  to  appoint  elders  in  the  churches  of  Crete.  But  clearly  Titus, 
like  Timothy,  was  merely  a  special  and  temporary  representative 
of  the  apostle  Paul ;  for  Titus  to  appoint  elders,  under  the  definite 
direction  of  Paul,  was  no  more  significant  than  for  Paul  to  appoint 
them  himself. 

(2)  The  Right  of  Congregational  Election. — On  the  whole,  it  may 
be  confidently  maintained  that  the  Presbyterian  method  of  choosing 
elders — namely  the  method  of  election  by  the  whole  congregation — 
is  more  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  apostolic  precedent  than 
any  other  method  that  has  been  proposed.  Throughout  the 
apostolic  Church,  the  congregation  was  evidently  given  a  very  large 
place  in  all  departments  of  the  Christian  life.  The  Jerusalem 
congregation,  for  example,  had  a  decisive  voice  in  choosing  the  very 


ORGANIZING  FOR  SERVICE  257 

first  Church  officers  who  are  known  to  have  been  added  to  the 
apostles.  Acts  6  :  2-6.  In  Thessalonica  and  in  Corinth  the  whole 
congregation  was  active  in  the  matter  of  church  discipline.  II 
Thess.  3  :  14,  15;  I  Cor.  5  :  3-5;  II  Cor.  2  :  6.  The  whole  congrega- 
tion was  also  invited  to  choose  delegates  for  carrying  the  gifts  of  the 
Corinthian  church  to  Jerusalem.  I  Cor.  16  :  3.  These  are  merely 
examples.  It  must  be  remembered,  moreover,  that  the  authority 
of  the  congregation  in  the  apostolic  age  was  limited  by  the  authority 
of  the  apostles,  which  was  special  and  temporary;  when  the  apostles 
should  be  removed,  the  congregational  functions  would  be  in- 
creased. Yet  even  the  apostles  were  exceedingly  careful  not  to 
destroy  the  liberties  of  the  rank  and  file.  Nowhere  in  the  apostolic 
Church  were  the  ordinary  church  members  treated  as  though  they 
were  without  rights  and  without  responsibilities.  Indeed,  even 
wrhen  the  apostles  appointed  elders,  they  may  have  previously 
ascertained  the  preferences  of  the  people. 

4.  THE  APOSTOLIC  PRECEDENT  AND  DEPARTURES  FROM  IT 

The  presbyterial  form  of  church  government — that  is,  govern- 
ment by  a  body  of  elders — which  is  found  in  the  apostolic  age,  differs 
strikingly  from  certain  later  developments.  In  several  particulars, 
at  least,  principles  have  become  prevalent  which  are  at  variance 
with  the  apostolic  model. 

(l)  The  Monarchical  Episcopate. — The  first  particular  concerns 
the  relation  of  the  church  officers  to  one  another.  In  the  apostolic 
Church,  as  we  have  observed,  there  was  a  parity  among  the  elders; 
the  local  congregation  was  governed,  not  by  an  individual,  but  by  a 
body.  As  early,  however,  as  the  first  part  of  the  second  century,  a 
change  had  taken  place,  at  least  in  many  of  the  churches.  The 
supreme  authority  had  come  to  be  held  by  an  individual,  called 
"bishop";  all  other  officers  were  clearly  subordinate  to  him;  the 
government  of  the  local  congregation  was  no  longer  presbyterial, 
but  monarchical;  the  so-called  "monarchical  episcopate"  had  been 
formed. 

This  state  of  affairs  appears  clearly  in  the  epistles  of  Ignatius, 
which  were  written  a  short  time  before  A.  D.  117.  But  all  attempts 
to  find  traces  of  the  monarchical  episcopate  in  the  apostolic  age 
have  resulted  in  failure.  The  Greek  word  episcopos,  which  is  trans- 
lated in  the  English  Bible — rather  misleadingly,  perhaps — by 
"bishop,"  is  applied,  not  to  a  special  officer  standing  above  the 
elders,  but  simply  to  the  elders  themselves.     "Elder"  designates 

Sen.  T.  III.  4. 


e58  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

the  office;  episcopos  designates  one  function  of  the  office.  The 
latter  word  could  hardly  have  been  used  in  this  general  way  if  it 
had  already  acquired  its  technical  significance. 

The  efforts  which  have  been  made  to  discover  references  to  the 
office  of  bishop  in  the  apostolic  age  are  unconvincing.  It  is  ex- 
ceedingly doubtful  whether  the  "angels"  of  the  seven  churches  to 
which  messages  are  sent  in  the  Apocalypse  are  to  be  regarded  as 
church  officers;  and  even  if  they  were  church  officers  it  is  by  no 
means  clear  that  they  exercised  the  functions  of  bishops.  Un- 
doubtedly Timothy  and  Titus  appear  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  with 
functions  similar  in  many  respects  to  those  of  bishops,  but  it  is  also 
clear  that  they  exercised  those  functions,  not  as  officers  of  the 
Church  who  might  have  successors,  but  merely  as  temporary 
representatives  of  the  apostle  Paul. 

(2)  The  Priesthood  of  the  Clergy. — An  even  more  important 
divergence  from  apostolic  conditions  concerns  the  functions  of  the 
church  officers.  According  to  a  theory  which  has  become  widely 
prevalent,  certain  officers  of  the  Church  are  to  be  regarded  as 
"priests" — that  is,  they  are  mediators  between  God  and  man. 
Curiously  enough  the  English  word  "priest,"  is  nothing  but  another 
form  of  the  word  "presbyter,"  which  means  "elder";  "presbyter"  is 
only  "priest"  "writ  large."  In  actual  usage,  however,  "priest"  means 
vastly  more  than  "presbyter";  it  designates  a  man  who  represents 
men  to  God  and  mediates  God's  actions  to  men.  So  understood, 
the  term  is  never  applied  in  the  New  Testament  to  church  officers  as 
such.  According  to  the  New  Testament,  the  only  priest  (in  the 
strict  sense)  under  the  new  dispensation  is  Christ;  Christ  is  the  only 
mediator  between  God  and  man,  I  Tim.  2:5;  the  high-priesthood 
of  Christ  is  elaborated  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  In  another 
sense,  indeed,  all  believers  are  priests,  I  Peter  2  :  5,  9;  Rev.  1:6; 
5  :  10;  20  :  6;  all  have  the  right  of  direct  access  to  God;  all  are 
devoted  to  a  holy  service.  The  idea  of  a  special  priesthood  in  the 
Christian  Church  is  strikingly  at  variance  with  the  apostolic 
teaching. 

(3)  Apostolic  Succession. — Another  point  of  variance  concerns 
the  manner  in  which  the  officers  of  the  Church  should  receive  their 
authority.  By  a  theory  prevalent  in  the  Church  of  England  and 
in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  America  as  well  as  in  the 
Greek  and  Roman  Catholic  Churches,  the  authority  of  the  clergy 
has  been  received  through  an  unbroken  line  of  transmission  from 
the  apostles;  the  immediate  successors  of  the  apostles  received  the 


ORGANIZING  FOR  SERVICE  259 

right  of  handing  down  the  commission  to  others,  and  so  on 
through  the  centuries;  without  an  ordination  derived  in  this  way 
no  one  can  be  a  ruler  in  the  true  Church;  and  without  submission 
to  such  regularly  ordained  rulers  no  body  of  persons  can  con- 
stitute a  branch  of  the  true  Church.  This  theory  places  a  tremen- 
dous power  in  the  hands  of  a  definite  body  of  persons  whose  moral 
qualifications  for  wielding  that  power  are  often  more  than  doubt- 
ful. Surely  so  stupendous  a  claim  can  be  made  good  only  by 
the  clear  pronouncement  of  a  recognized  authority. 

Such  a  pronouncement  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  New  Testament. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  to  show  that  the  apostles  pro- 
vided for  a  transmission  of  their  authority  through  a  succession  of 
persons.  On  the  contrary,  their  authority  seems  to  have  been 
special  and  temporary,  like  the  miraculous  powers  with  which  they 
were  endowed.  The  regular  church  officers  who  were  appointed 
in  the  apostolic  age  evidently  possessed  no  apostolic  authority; 
however  chosen,  they  were  essentially  representatives  of  the  con- 
gregation. A  true  branch  of  the  Church  could  exist,  at  least  in 
theory,  without  any  officers  at  all,  wherever  true  believers  were  to- 
gether; the  Church  did  not  depend  upon  the  officers,  but  the  officers 
upon  the  Church. 

5.  RELATIONS  OF  THE  CONGREGATIONS  TO  ONE  ANOTHER 

So  far,  the  organization  of  the  apostolic  Church  has  been  con- 
sidered only  in  so  far  as  it  concerned  the  individual  congregation;  a 
word  must  now  be  said  about  the  relation  of  the  congregations  to  one 
another. 

That  relation,  in  the  apostolic  age,  was  undoubtedly  very  close. 
The  Pauline  Epistles,  in  particular,  give  an  impression  of  active  in- 
tercourse among  the  churches.  The  Thessalonian  Christians  "be- 
came an  ensample  to  all  that  believe  in  Macedonia  and  in  Achaia"; 
the  story  of  their  conversion  became  known  "in  every  place." 
I  Thess.  1  :  7-10.  In  the  matter  of  the  collection,  Macedonia 
stirred  up  Achaia,  and  Achaia  Macedonia.  II  Cor.  8  :  1-6;  9  :  1-4. 
The  faith  of  the  Roman  Christians  was  "proclaimed  throughout  the 
whole  world."  Rom.  1  :  8.  Judea  heard  of  the  missionary  labors 
of  Paul,  Gal.  1  :  21-24;  fellowship  between  Jews  and  Gentiles  was 
maintained  by  the  collection  for  the  Jerusalem  saints.  Evidently 
the  apostolic  Church  was  animated  by  a  strong  sense  of  unity. 

This  feeling  of  unity  was  maintained  especially  by  the  instru- 
mentality of  the  apostles,  who,  with  their  helpers,  traveled  from  one 


260  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

congregation  to  another,  and  exerted  a  unifying  authority  over  all. 
Certainly  there  was  nothing  like  a  universal  Church  council; 
Christian  fellowship  was  maintained  in  a  thoroughly  informal  way. 
In  order  that  such  fellowship  should  be  permanent,  however,  there 
would  obviously  be  an  increasing  need  for  some  sort  of  official  union 
among  the  congregations.  When  the  apostles  passed  away,  their 
place  would  have  to  be  taken  by  representative  assemblies;  in- 
creasing complexity  of  life  brought  increasing  need  of  organization. 
The  representative  assemblies  of  our  own  Church,  therefore,  meet 
an  obvious  need;  and  both  in  their  free,  representative  character 
and  in  their  unifying  purpose  it  may  fairly  be  claimed  that  they  are 
true  to  the  spirit  of  the  apostolic  age. 

6.    PRINCIPLES 

The  apostolic  precedent  with  regard  to  organization  should 
always  be  followed  in  spirit  as  well  as  in  form.  Three  principles, 
especially,  are  to  be  observed  in  the  Church  organization  of  the 
apostolic  age.  In  the  first  place,  there  was  considerable  freedom 
in  details.  No  Christian  who  had  gifts  of  any  kind  was  ordinarily 
prevented  from  exercising  them.  In  the  second  place,  there  was 
respect  for  the  constituted  authority,  whatever  it  might  be.  Such 
respect,  moreover,  was  not  blind  devotion  to  a  ruling  class,  but 
the  respect  which  is  ennobled  by  love.  Finally,  in  Church  organi- 
zation, as  in  all  the  affairs  of  life,  what  was  regarded  as  really 
essential  was  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  When  Timothy 
laid  his  hands  upon  a  new  elder,  the  act  signified  the  bestowal  of, 
or  the  prayer  for,  divine  favor.  This  last  lesson,  especially,  needs 
to  be  learned  to-day.  Without  the  grace  of  God,  the  best  of 
Church  organizations  is  mere  machinery  without  power. 


In  The  Library. — Davis,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  articles  on 
"Elder,"  "Deacon,"  "Deaconess,"  "Laying  on  of  Hands."  Hastings, 
"Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Gayford,  article  on  "Church";  Gwatkin, 
article  on  "Church  Government  in  the  Apostolic  Age."  Lightfoot, 
"The  Christian  Ministry,"  in  "Saint  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians," 
pp.  181-269,  and  in  "Dissertations  on  the  Apostolic  Age,"  pp.  135-238. 
Charteris,  "The  Church  of  Christ,"  pp.  1-43,  130-170,  205-239. 
Falconer,  "  From  Apostle  to  Priest."  MacPherson,  "  Presbyterianism" 
(in  "Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes"). 


LESSON  XLVII 
A  MISSION  FOR  THE  WORLD 


1.     JUDAISM  AND  CHRISTIANITY 

In  teaching  the  lesson  in  class,  it  might  be  well  simply  to  review 
the  principal  steps  in  the  geographical  extension  of  the  apostolic 
Church.  This  geographical  advance,  however,  was  made  possible 
only  by  an  advance  in  principles  which  should  not  be  ignored.  The 
really  great  step  in  the  early  Christian  mission  was  not  the  progress 
from  Jerusalem  to  Antioch,  or  from  Antioch  to  Asia  Minor  and  to 
Greece,  but  the  progress  from  a  national  to  a  universal  religion. 
Judaism,  despite  its  missionary  activity,  always  identified  the 
Church  more  or  less  closely  with  the  nation;  it  was  a  distinctly- 
national  religion.  Full  union  with  it  meant  the  abandonment  of 
one's  own  racial  and  national  relationships. 

(1)  Limitations  of  Judaism. — The  national  character  of  Judaism 
was  an  insurmountable  hindrance  to  the  Jewish  mission.  Despite 
the  hindrance,  it  is  true,  Judaism  achieved  important  conquests; 
it  won  many  adherents  throughout  the  Greco-Roman  world. 
These  missionary  achievements  undoubtedly  form  an  eloquent 
testimony  to  the  power  of  Israel's  faith;  despite  those  features  of 
Jewish  custom  which  were  repulsive  to  the  Gentile  mind,  the  belief 
in  the  one  true  God  and  the  lofty  ethical  ideal  of  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures  possessed  an  irresistible  attraction  for  many  earnest 
souls.  Nevertheless,  so  long  as  Jewish  monotheism  and  Jewish 
ethics  were  centered  altogether  in  the  life  of  a  very  peculiar  people, 
they  could  never  really  succeed  in  winning  the  nations  of  the  world. 

(2)  Apparent  Identity  of  Judaism  and  Christianity. — At  first  it 
looked  as  though  Christianity  were  to  share  in  the  limitation;  it 
looked  as  though  the  disciples  of  Jesus  formed  merely  a  Jewish  sect. 
Undoubtedly  they  would  bring  the  Jewish  people  to  a  loftier  faith 
and  to  a  purer  life;  they  would  themselves  become  better  and  nobler 
Jews;  but  Jews  they  would  apparently  always  remain. 

(3)  The  Great  Transition. — Before  many  years  had  passed,  how- 
ever, the  limitation  was  gloriously  transcended.  Christianity  was 
no  longer  bound  to  Judaism.     It  became  a  religion  for  the  world, 

261 


262  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

within  whose  capacious  borders  there  was  room  for  every  nation 
and  every  race.     How  was  the  transition  accomplished? 

It  was  not  accomplished  by  any  contemptuous  repudiation  of  the 
age-long  exclusiveness  of  Israel.  Such  repudiation  would  have 
involved  the  discrediting  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  to  the  Old 
Testament  the  Church  was  intensely  loyal.  Jewish  particularism 
had  been  ordered  of  God ;  the  Scriptures  were  full  of  warnings  against 
any  mingling  of  the  chosen  people  with  its  neighbors.  Jehovah  had 
made  of  Israel  a  people  alone;  he  had  planted  it  in  an  inaccessible 
hill  country,  remote  from  the  great  currents  of  the  world's  thought 
and  life;  he  had  preserved  its  separateness  even  amid  the  changing 
fortunes  of  captivity  and  war.  Salvation  was  to  be  found  only  in 
Israel;  Israel  was  the  chosen  people. 

The  Church  never  abandoned  this  view  of  Israelitish  history. 
Yet  for  herself  she  transcended  the  particularism  that  it  involved. 
She  did  so  in  a  very  simple  way — merely  by  recognizing  that  a  new 
era  had  begun.  In  the  old  era,  particularism  had  a  rightful  place; 
it  was  no  mere  prejudice,  but  a  divine  ordinance.  But  now,  in  the 
age  of  the  Messiah,  particularism  had  given  place  to  universalism; 
the  religion  of  Israel  had  become  a  religion  of  the  world.  What 
had  formerly  been  right  had  now  become  wrong;  God  himself  had 
ushered  in  a  new  and  more  glorious  dispensation.  Particularism, 
in  the  divine  economy,  had  served  a  temporary,  though  beneficent, 
purpose;  God  had  separated  Israel  from  the  world  in  order  that  the 
precious  deposit  of  Israel's  faith,  pure  of  all  heathen  alloy,  might 
finally  be  given  freely  to  all. 

The  recognition  of  this  wonderful  new  dispensation  of  God  was 
accomplished  in  two  ways. 

2.     THE  DIVINE  GUIDANCE 

In  the  first  place,  it  was  accomplished  by  the  direct  command  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  The  first  preaching  to  Gentiles  was  undertaken 
not  because  the  missionaries  understood  why  it  should  be  done,  but 
simply  because  God  commanded. 

(1)  Philip. — For  example,  when  Philip  preached  to  the  Ethiopian 
— who  was  not  in  the  strictest  sense  a  member  of  the  Jewish  people — 
he  was  acting  not  in  accordance  with  any  reflection  of  his  own — a 
desert  road  was  a  very  unlikely  place  for  missionary  service — but 
under  the  plain  and  palpable  guidance  of  the  Spirit.  What  is  em- 
phasized in  the  whole  narrative  is  the  strange,  unaccountable 
character  of  Philip's  movements;  evidently  his  actions  at  such  a 


A  MISSION  FOR  THE  WORLD  263 

time  were  not  open  to  criticism ;  what  Philip  did  God  did ;  if  Philip 
preached  to  an  outsider,  such  preaching  was  God's  will.  Acts  8  : 
26-40. 

(2)  Cornelius. — In  the  case  of  the  conversion  of  Cornelius  and 
his  friends,  Acts  10  :  1  to  11  :  18,  the  divine  warrant  was  just  as 
plain.  Both  Cornelius  and  Peter  acted  altogether  in  accordance 
with  God's  guidance.  On  the  housetop,  Peter's  scruples  were 
unmistakably  overcome.  "What  God  hath  cleansed,"  he  was  told, 
"make  not  thou  common."  Peter  did  not  fully  comprehend  the 
strange  command  that  he  should  eat  what  the  law  forbade,  and  it 
was  not  explained  to  him;  but  at  least  the  command  was  a  command 
of  God,  and  must  certainly  be  obeyed.  The  meaning  of  the  vision 
became  clear  when  Cornelius'  house  was  entered;  a  Gentile  had 
evidently  been  granted  the  offer  of  the  gospel.  God  was  no  re- 
specter of  persons.  Finally  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  on  all  the  Gentiles 
who  heard  the  message;  they  spake  with  tongues  as  the  disciples 
had  done  at  the  first.  That  was  the  crowning  manifestation  of 
God's  will.  There  was  no  reason  to  wait  for  circumcision  or  union 
with  the  people  of  Israel.  "Can  any  man  forbid  the  water," 
said  Peter,  "that  these  should  not  be  baptized,  who  have  received 
the  Holy  Spirit  as  well  as  we?"  Acts  10  :  47.  All  opposition  was 
broken  down;  only  one  conclusion  was  possible;  the  Jerusalem 
Christians  "glorified  God,  saying,  Then  to  the  Gentiles  also  hath 
God  granted  repentance  unto  life."     Acts  11  :  18. 

(3)  The  Grace  of  God  in  the  Gentile  Mission. — Scarcely  less 
palpable  was  the  divine  guidance  in  the  subsequent  developments 
of  the  Gentile  mission.  After  the  momentous  step  of  certain  un- 
named Jews  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene,  who  founded  the  church  at 
Antioch,  Barnabas  had  no  difficulty  in  recognizing  the  grace  of  God. 
Acts  11  :  23.  Not  suspicion,  but  only  gladness,  was  in  place. 
When  Paul  and  Barnabas  returned  from  the  first  Gentile  mission, 
they  could  report  to  the  Antioch  church  that  God  had  plainly 
"opened  a  door  of  faith  unto  the  Gentiles."  Ch.  14  :  27.  If 
God  had  opened,  who  could  close?  At  the  apostolic  council,  in 
the  very  face  of  bitter  opposition,  the  same  great  argument  was 
used.  The  missionaries  simply  "rehearsed  all  things  that  God 
had  done  with  them,"  ch.  15  :  4,  especially  "what  signs  and  wonders 
God  had  wrought  among  the  Gentiles  through  them."  V.  12. 
There  was  only  one  thing  to  be  done;  the  Gentile  mission  must  be 
accepted  with  gladness  as  a  gift  of  God;  he  that  wrought  for  Peter 
unto  the  apostleship  of  the  circumcision  wrought  for  Paul  also  unto 


264  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

the  Gentiles,  Gal.  2:8;  James  and  Peter  and  John  could  recognize, 
both  in  the  Gentile  mission  and  in  the  inner  life  of  the  chief  mis- 
sionary, the  plainest  possible  manifestation  of  the  grace  of  God. 
V.  9. 

3.  REASONS  FOR  GENTILE  FREEDOM 

The  Church  transcended  the  bounds  of  Judaism,  then,  primarily 
because  of  a  direct  command  of  God.  Such  commands  must  be 
obeyed  whether  they  are  understood  or  not.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
however,  God  did  not  leave  the  matter  in  such  an  unsatisfactory 
state;  he  revealed  not  only  his  will,  but  also  the  reason  for  it;  he 
showed  not  only  that  the  Gentiles  must  be  received  into  the  Church, 
but  also  why  they  must  be  received.  The  essence  of  the  gospel 
had  demanded  Gentile  freedom  from  the  beginning;  the  justifica- 
tion of  that  freedom  at  the  bar  of  reason,  therefore,  brought  a 
clearer  understanding  of  the  gospel  itself. 

Two  contrasts,  at  least,  enabled  the  Church  to  explain  the  reason 
why  the  Gentiles  could  be  saved  without  becoming  Jews.  The 
first  was  the  contrast  between  faith  and  works,  between  grace 
and  the  law;  the  second  was  the  contrast  between  the  type  and  the 
thing  typified.  The  former  was  revealed  especially  to  Paul;  the 
latter  to  the  author  of  Hebrews. 

(1)  The  Law  and  Grace. — Salvation  through  Christ,  according  to 
Paul,  is  an  absolutely  free  gift.  It  cannot  be  earned ;  it  must  simply 
be  received.  In  other  words,  it  comes  not  by  works,  but  by  faith. 
The  law  of  God,  on  the  other  hand,  of  which  the  Mosaic  law  was 
the  clearest  embodiment,  offers  a  different  means  of  obtaining 
God's  favor.  It  simply  presents  a  series  of  commandments,  and 
offers  salvation  on  condition  that  they  be  obeyed.  But  the  trouble 
is,  the  commandments,  since  the  fall,  cannot  be  obeyed;  everyone 
has  incurred  deadly  guilt  through  his  disobedience;  the  power  of  the 
flesh  is  too  strong.  At  that  point,  however,  God  intervened.  He 
offered  Christ  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin  that  all  believers  might  have  a 
fresh  start;  and  he  bestowed  the  Spirit  of  the  living  Christ  that  all 
might  have  strength  to  lead  a  new  life.  But  Christ  will  do  every- 
thing or  nothing.  A  man  must  take  his  choice.  There  are  only 
two  ways  of  obtaining  salvation — the  perfect  keeping  of  the  law,  or 
the  simple,  unconditional  acceptance  of  what  Christ  has  done. 
The  first  is  excluded  because  of  sin;  the  second  has  become  a  glorious 
reality  in  the  Church. 

If,  however,  salvation  is  through  the  free  gift  of  Christ,  then  the 
law  religion  has  been  superseded.     All  those  features  of  the  law 


A  MISSION  FOR  THE  WORLD  265 

which  were  intended  to  make  the  law  palpable,  as  a  set  of  external 
rules,  are  abrogated.  The  Christian,  indeed,  performs  the  will  of 
God — in  the  deepest  sense  Christianity  only  confirms  the  law — but 
he  performs  it,  not  by  slavish  obedience  to  a  complex  of  external 
commandments,  but  by  willing  submission  to  the  Spirit  of  God. 

Of  course,  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  was  not,  according 
to  Paul,  purely  a  law  religion ;  on  the  contrary  Paul  quotes  the  Old 
Testament  in  support  of  faith.  But  there  was  a  law  element  in  the 
Old  Testament;  and  the  law  served  merely  a  temporary,  though 
beneficent,  purpose.  It  was  intended  to  deepen  the  sense  of  sin 
and  hopelessness,  in  order  that  finally  salvation  might  be  sought 
not  in  man's  way  but  in  God's.  The  new  order  at  length  has  come; 
in  Christ  we  are  free  men,  and  should  never  return  to  the  former 
bondage.  The  middle  wall  of  partition  has  been  done  away;  the 
ordinances  of  the  law  no  longer  separate  Jew  and  Gentile;  all  alike 
have  access  through  one  Saviour  unto  God,  all  alike  receive  power 
through  the  Holy  Spirit  to  live  a  life  of  holiness  and  love. 

(2)  The  Type  and  the  Fulfillment. — The  contrast  which  was 
worked  out  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  especially  a  contrast 
between  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified.  The  ceremonial  law, 
which  had  separated  Jew  from  Gentile,  was  intended  to  point 
forward  to  Christ;  and  now  that  the  fulfillment  has  come,  what 
further  need  is  there  of  the  old  types  and  symbols?  Christ  is  the 
great  High  Priest;  by  him  all  alike  can  enter  into  the  holy  place. 

(3)  The  Meaning  of  the  Gospel. — The  transition  from  Jewish 
Christianity,  with  all  the  difficulties  of  that  transition,  led  finally 
to  a  deeper  understanding  of  the  gospel.  It  showed  once  for  all 
that  the  salvation  of  the  Christians  is  a  free  gift.  "Just  as  I  am, 
without  one  plea  but  that  thy  blood  was  shed  for  me" — these 
words  are  a  good  summary  of  the  result  of  the  Judaistic  controversy. 
The  transition  showed,  furthermore,  what  had  really  been  felt  from 
the  beginning,  that  Christ  was  the  one  and  all-sufficient  Lord. 
When  he  was  present,  no  other  priest,  and  no  other  sacrifice  was 
required.  That  is  the  truly  missionary  gospel — the  gospel  that 
will  finally  conquer  the  world. 


In  the  Library. — Orr,  "Neglected  Factors  in  the  Study  of  the 
Early  Progress  of  Christianity"  and  "The  Early  Church."  George 
Smith,  "Short  History  of  Christian  Missions"  (in  "Handbooks  for 
Bible  Classes"). 


LESSON  XLVIII 
THE  CHRISTIAN  IDEAL  OF  PERSONAL  MORALITY 


In  treating  the  lesson  for  to-day,  the  teacher  will  be  embarrassed 
by  the  wealth  of  his  material.  It  is  important,  therefore,  that  the 
chief  purpose  of  the  lesson  should  not  be  lost  amid  a  mass  of  details. 
That  chief  purpose  is  the  presentation  of  Christianity  as  something 
that  has  a  very  definite  and  immediate  bearing  upon  daily  life. 
Christianity  is  first  of  all  a  piece  of  good  news,  a  record  of  something 
that  has  happened;  but  the  effect  of  it,  if  it  be  sincerely  received, 
is  always  manifest  in  holy  living. 

1.     THE  EXAMPLE  OF  JESUS 

In  the  Student's  Text  Book,  little  attempt  was  made  at  detailed 
analysis  of  the  apostolic  ideal.  The  defect  should  be  supplied  by 
careful  attention  to  the  'Topics  for  Study,"  and  also,  if  possible,  by 
the  treatment  of  the  lesson  in  class.  First  of  all,  however,  it 
should  be  observed  how  naturally  the  apostolic  presentation  of  the 
ideal  grows  out  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  The  advance  which 
revelation  made  after  the  close  of  Jesus'  earthly  ministry  concerned 
the  fuller  explanation  of  the  means  by  which  the  moral  ideal  is  to 
be  attained  rather  than  additional  exposition  of  the  ideal  itself. 
That  does  not  mean  that  the  apostles  did  no  more,  in  the  field  of 
ethics,  than  quote  the  words  of  Jesus;  indeed  there  seem  to  be  sur- 
prisingly few  direct  quotations  of  the  words  of  Jesus  in  the  apostolic 
writings ;  the  ethical  teaching  of  the  apostolic  Church  was  no  mere 
mechanical  repetition  of  words,  but  a  profound  application  of 
principles.  Nevertheless  the  teaching  of  Jesus  was  absolutely 
fundamental;  without  an  examination  of  it,  the  moral  life  of  the 
apostolic  Church  cannot  be  fully  understood. 

(1)  The  Inexorableness  of  the  Law. — Jesus  had  insisted,  for  ex- 
ample, upon  the  inexorableness  of  the  law  of  God.  To  the  keeping 
of  God's  commandments  everything  else  must  be  sacrificed.  "If 
thy  right  eye  causeth  thee  to  stumble,  pluck  it  out,  and  cast  it 
from  thee:  for  it  is  profitable  for  thee  that  one  of  thy  members 
should  perish,  and  not  thy  whole  body  be  cast  into  hell."  Matt. 
5:29.     In  this  respect  the  apostles  were  true  disciples  of  their 

266 


CHRISTIAN  IDEAL  OF  PERSONAL  MORALITY      267 

Master.  The  Christian,  they  insisted,  must  be  absolutely  ruthless; 
he  must  be  willing  to  sacrifice  everything  he  has  for  moral  purity. 

This  ruthlessness,  however,  this  thoroughgoing  devotion  to 
moral  purity,  did  not  mean  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  any  more 
than  in  that  of  the  apostles,  that  under  ordinary  conditions  the 
Christian  ought  to  withdraw  from  the  simple  pleasures  that  the 
world  offers.  Jesus  himself  took  his  place  freely  at  feasts;  so  far 
was  he  from  leading  a  stern,  ascetic  life  that  his  enemies  could 
even  accuse  him  of  being  a  winebibber  and  a  friend  of  publicans 
and  sinners.  The  fidelity  with  which  the  apostles  followed  this 
part  of  their  Master's  example  has  been  pointed  out  in  the 
Student's  Text  Book.  The  enjoyable  things  of  the  earth  are  not 
evil  in  themselves;  they  are  to  be  received  with  thanksgiving  as 
gifts  of  the  heavenly  Father,  and  then  dedicated  to  his  service. 

(2)  The  Morality  of  the  Heart. — Furthermore,  Jesus,  as  well  as 
his  apostles,  emphasized  the  inwardness  of  the  moral  law.  Here 
again  the  apostolic  Church  was  faithful  to  Jesus'  teaching.  The 
seat  of  sin  was  placed  by  the  apostles  in  the  very  center  of  a  man's 
life;  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit  wage  their  warfare  in  the  battle  field 
of  the  heart.     See,  for  example,  Gal.  5:  16-24. 

2.     CONTRASTS 

The  sharp  difference  between  the  Christian  life  and  the  life  of  the 
world  was  set  forth  in  the  apostolic  teaching  by  means  of  various 
contrasts. 

(1)  Death  and  Life. — In  the  first  place,  there  was  the  contrast 
between  death  and  life.  The  man  of  the  world,  according  to  the 
apostles,  is  not  merely  ill;  he  is  morally  and  spiritually  dead.  Col. 
2  :  13;  Eph.  2  :  1,  5.  There  is  no  hope  for  him  in  his  old  existence; 
that  existence  is  merely  a  death  in  life.  But  God  is  One  who  can 
raise  the  dead ;  and  as  he  raised  Jesus  from  the  tomb  on  the  third 
day,  so  he  raises  those  who  belong  to  Jesus  from  the  deadness  of 
their  sins;  he  implants  in  them  a  new  life  in  which  they  can  bring 
forth  fruits  unto  God.  A  moral  miracle,  according  to  the  New 
Testament,  stands  at  the  beginning  of  Christian  experience.  That 
miracle  was  called  by  Jesus  himself,  as  well  as  by  the  apostles,  a  new 
birth  or  "regeneration."  It  is  no  work  of  man;  only  God  can 
raise  the  dead.  See  John  1  :  13;  3  :  1-21;  I  John  2  :  29;  I  Peter 
1  :3,  23. 

(2)  Darkness  and  Light. — The  contrast  between  darkness  and 
light,  also,  was  common  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus  and  that  of  his 


C68  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

apostles.  It  appears  particularly  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  but  there 
are  also  clear  traces  of  it  in  the  Synoptists,  Matt.  5  :  14-16;  the 
righteous  are  "the  sons  of  the  light."  Luke  16:8.  In  the  writings 
of  the  apostles  the  contrast  appears  in  many  forms.  "Ye  are  all 
sons  of  light,"  said  Paul,  "and  sons  of  the  day:  we  are  not  of  the 
night,  nor  of  darkness;  so  then  let  us  not  sleep,  as  do  the  rest,  but 
let  us  watch  and  be  sober."  I  Thess.  5:5,  6.  "Ye  were  once 
darkness,  but  are  now  light  in  the  Lord:  walk  as  children  of  light." 
Eph.  5  :  8.  God  has  called  us  "out  of  darkness  into  his  marvellous 
light."  I  Peter  2  :  9.  The  contrast  serves  admirably  to  represent 
the  honesty  and  openness  and  cleanness  of  the  true  Christian  life. 

(3)  Flesh  and  Spirit. — An  even  more  important  contrast  is  the 
contrast  of  flesh  and  Spirit,  which  is  expounded  especially  by  Paul. 
"Flesh"  in  this  connection  means  something  more  than  the  bodily 
side  of  human  nature;  it  means  human  nature  as  a  whole,  so  far 
as  it  is  not  subjected  to  God.  "Spirit"  also  means  something  more 
than  might  be  supposed  on  a  superficial  examination.  It  does  not 
mean  the  spiritual,  as  distinguished  from  the  material,  side  of 
human  nature;  but  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Spirit  of  God.  The  war- 
fare, therefore,  between  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit,  which  is  mentioned 
so  often  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  is  a  warfare  between  sin  and  God. 

The  flesh,  according  to  Paul,  is  a  mighty  power,  which  is  too 
strong  for  the  human  will.  It  is  impossible  for  the  natural  man  to 
keep  the  law  of  God.  "I  know,"  says  Paul,  "that  in  me,  that  is, 
in  my  flesh,  dwelleth  no  good  thing:  for  to  will  is  present  with  me, 
but  to  do  that  which  is  good  is  not.  .  .  I  find  then  the  law,  that, 
to  me  who  would  do  good,  evil  is  present.  For  I  delight  in  the  law 
of  God  after  the  inward  man:  but  I  see  a  different  law  in  my  mem- 
bers, warring  against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and  bringing  me  into 
captivity  under  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  my  members."  Rom. 
7  :  18,  21-23.  In  this  recognition  of  the  power  of  sin  in  human  life, 
Paul  has  laid  his  finger  upon  one  of  the  deepest  facts  in  human 
experience. 

The  way  of  escape,  however,  has  been  provided;  sin  has  been 
conquered  in  two  aspects. 

It  has  been  conquered,  in  the  first  place,  in  its  guilt.  Without 
that  conquest,  everything  else  would  be  useless.  The  dreadful 
subjection  to  the  power  of  sin,  which  becomes  so  abundantly  plain 
in  evil  habit,  was  itself  a  punishment  for  sin;  before  the  effect  can 
be  destroyed,  the  guilt  which  caused  it  must  be  removed.  It  has 
been  removed  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.     Christ  has  died  for  us, 


CHRISTIAN  IDEAL  OF  PERSONAL  MORALITY      269 

the  Just  for  the  unjust;  through  his  death  we  have  a  fresh  start, 
in  the  favor  of  God,  with  the  guilty  past  wiped  out. 

Sin  has  been  conquered,  in  the  second  place,  in  its  power.  To- 
gether with  the  very  implanting  of  faith  in  our  hearts,  the  Holy 
Spirit  has  given  us  a  new  life,  a  new  power,  by  which  we  can  per- 
form the  works  of  God.  A  mighty  warfare,  indeed,  is  yet  before 
us;  but  it  is  fought  with  the  Spirit's  help,  and  by  the  Spirit  it 
will  finally  be  won. 

(4)  The  Old  Man  and  the  New. — As  the  contrast  between  the 
flesh  and  the  Spirit  was  concerned  with  the  causes  of  the  Christian's 
escape  from  sin,  so  the  contrast  now  to  be  considered  is  concerned 
with  the  effects  of  that  escape.  The  Christian,  according  to  Paul, 
has  become  a  new  man  in  Christ;  the  old  man  has  been  destroyed. 
The  Gentiles,  he  says,  are  darkened  in  their  understanding,  and 
alienated  from  God.  Eph.  4:  17-19.  "But  ye  did  not-  so  learn 
Christ;  if  so  be  that  ye  heard  him,  and  were  taught  in  him,  even  as 
truth  is  in  Jesus:  that  ye  put  away,  as  concerning  your  former 
manner  of  life,  the  old  man,  that  waxeth  corrupt  after  the  lusts  of 
deceit;  and  that  ye  be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  your  mind,  and  put 
on  the  new  man,  that  after  God  hath  been  created  in  righteousness 
and  holiness  of  truth."  Vs.  20-24.  Compare  Col.  3  :  5-11.  This 
putting  on  of  the  new  man  is  included  in  what  Paul  elsewhere  calls 
putting  on  Christ.  Gal.  3  :  27;  Rom.  13  :  14.  The  true  Christian 
has  clothed  himself  with  Christ;  the  lineaments  of  the  old  sinful 
nature  have  been  transformed  into  the  blessed  features  of  the 
Master;  look  upon  the  Christian,  and  what  you  see  is  Christ!  This 
change  has  been  wrought  by  Christ  himself;  "it  is  no  longer  I  that 
live,"  says  Paul,  "but  Christ  liveth  in  me";  Christ  finds  expression 
in  the  life  of  the  Christian.  It  is  noteworthy,  however,  that  the 
"putting  on"  of  Christ,  which  in  Gal.  3  :  27  is  represented  as  an  ac- 
complished fact,  is  in  Rom.  13  :  14  inculcated  as  a  duty.  It  has 
been  accomplished  already  in  principle — in  his  sacrificial  death, 
Christ  has  already  taken  our  place  in  the  sight  of  God — but  the 
practical  realization  of  it  in  conduct  is  the  lifelong  task  which 
every  earnest  disciple,  aided  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  must  prosecute 
with  might  and  main. 

3.     THE  NEW  MAN 

Details  in  the  character  of  the  "new  man,"  as  they  are  revealed 
in  the  apostolic  writings,  can  here  be  treated  only  very  briefly. 
(1)  Honesty. — Certainly  the  Christian,  according  to  the  apostles, 


270  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

must  be  honest.  Honesty  is  the  foundation  of  the  virtues;  without 
it  everything  else  is  based  upon  the  sand.  Nothing  could  exceed 
the  fine  scorn  which  the  New  Testament  heaps  upon  anything  like 
hypocrisy  or  deceit.  The  Epistle  of  James,  in  particular,  is  a 
plea  for  profound  reality  in  all  departments  of  life.  Away  with  all 
deceit!  The  Christian  life  is  to  be  lived  in  the  full  blaze  of  God's 
sunlight. 

Many  hours  could  be  occupied  in  the  class  with  the  applications 
of  honesty  under  modern  conditions.  Student  life,  for  example,  is 
full  of  temptations  to  dishonesty.  To  say  nothing  of  out-and-out 
cheating,  there  are  a  hundred  ways  in  which  the  fine  edge  of  honor 
can  be  blunted.  In  business  life,  also,  temptations  are  many;  and 
indeed  no  one  can  really  escape  the  test.  The  apostolic  example 
deserves  to  be  borne  in  mind;  Christian  honesty  ought  to  be  more 
than  the  honesty  of  the  world. 

(2)  Purity. — In  the  second  place,  the  apostolic  Church  presents 
an  ideal  of  purity,  purity  in  thought  as  well  as  in  word  and  deed. 
The  ideal  must  have  seemed  strange  to  the  degraded  populations 
of  Corinth  and  Ephesus;  but  it  is  also  sadly  needed  to-day.  Let 
us  not  deceive  ourselves.  He  who  would  hold  fellowship  with 
Christ  must  put  away  impurity;  Christ  is  the  holy  One.  Purity, 
however,  is  to  be  attained  not  by  unaided  human  effort,  but  by 
the  help  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  The  Holy  Spirit,  if  he  be  admitted  to 
the  heart,  will  purge  it  of  unclean  thoughts. 

(3)  Patience  and  Bravery. — In  the  third  place,  patience  and 
humility  are  prominent  in  the  Christian  ideal.  These  virtues  are 
coupled,  however,  with  the  most  vigorous  bravery.  There  is 
nothing  weak  or  sickly  or  sentimental  about  the  Christian  character. 
"Watch  ye,  stand  fast  in  the  faith,  quit  you  like  men,  be  strong." 
I  Cor.  16  :  13. 

(4)  Love. — The  summation  of  the  Christian  ideal  is  love.  Love, 
however,  is  more  than  a  benevolent  desire.  It  includes  purity  and 
heroism  as  well  as  helpfulness.  In  order  to  love  in  the  Christian 
sense,  one  must  attain  "unto  a  fullgrown  man,  unto  the  measure  of 
the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ."     Eph.  4  :  13. 


In  the  Library. — Hastings,  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible":  Strong, 
article  on  "Ethics"  (II).  Kilpatrick,  "Christian  Character."  Bruce, 
"The  Formation  of  Christian  Character."  Luthardt,  "Apologetic 
Lectures  on  the  Moral  Truths  of  Christianity." 


LESSON  XLIX 
CHRISTIANITY  AND  HUMAN  RELATIONSHIPS 


1.     THE  PROBLEM 

Two  apparently  contradictory  features  appear  in  the  life  of  the 
apostolic  Church.  In  the  first  place,  there  was  an  intense  other- 
Vvorldliness;  the  Christians  were  regarded  as  citizens  of  a  heavenly 
kingdom.  In  the  second  place,  there  was  careful  attention  to  the 
various  relationships  of  the  present  life;  no  man  was  excused  from 
homely  duty.  The  two  sides  of  the  picture  appear  in  the  sharpest 
colors  in  the  life  of  the  apostle  Paul.  No  one  emphasized  more 
strongly  than  he  the  independence  of  the  Christian  life  with  refer- 
ence to  the  world ;  all  Christians,  whether  their  worldly  station  be 
high  or  low,  are  alike  in  the  sight  of  God ;  the  Church  operates 
with  entirely  new  standards  of  value.  Yet  on  the  other  hand,  in 
his  actual  dealing  with  the  affairs  of  this  world  Paul  observed  the 
most  delicate  tact;  and  in  all  history  it  is  difficult  to  find  a  man 
with  profounder  natural  affections.  Where  is  there,  for  example,  a 
more  passionate  expression  of  patriotic  feeling  than  that  which  is 
to  be  found  in  Rom.  9:3?  "I  could  wish  that  I  myself  were 
anathema  from  Christ  for  my  brethren's  sake,  my  kinsmen  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh." 

On  the  one  hand,  then,  the  apostolic  Church  regarded  all  earthly 
distinctions  as  temporary  and  secondary,  and  yet  on  the  other  hand 
those  same  distinctions  were  very  carefully  observed.  The  apparent 
contradiction  brings  before  us  the  great  question  of  the  attitude  of 
Christianity  toward  human  relationships.  This  question  may  be 
answered  in  one  of  three  ways. 

2.     THE  WORLDLY  SOLUTION 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  the  worldly  answer.  The  Christian 
finds  himself  in  a  world  where  his  time  and  his  thoughts  seem  to  be 
fully  occupied  by  what  lies  near  at  hand.  The  existence  of  God 
may  not  be  denied,  but  practically,  in  the  stress  of  more  obvious 
duties,  God  is  left  out  of  account. 

(1)  "Practical  Christianity," — In  its  crude  form,  of  course,  where 

271 


272  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

it  involves  mere  engrossment  in  selfish  pleasure,  this  answer  to  our 
question  hardly  needs  refutation.  Obviously  the  Christian  cannot 
devote  himself  to  worldly  enjoyment;  a  cardinal  virtue  of  the  Chris- 
tian is  self-denial.  Worldliness  in  the  Church,  however,  may  be  taken 
in  a  wider  sense;  it  has  often  assumed  very  alluring  forms.  At  the 
present  day,  for  example,  it  often  represents  itself  as  the  only  true, 
the  only  "practical"  kind  of  Christianity.  It  is  often  said  that 
true  religion  is  identical  with  social  service,  that  the  service  of  one's 
fellow  men  is  always  worship  of  God.  This  assertion  involves  a 
depreciation  of  "dogma"  in  the  interests  of  "practical"  Christianity; 
it  makes  no  difference,  it  is  said,  what  a  man  believes,  provided  only 
he  engages  in  the  improvement  of  living  conditions  and  the  pro- 
motion of  fairer  laws. 

(2)  This  World  Is  Not  All. — This  tendency  in  the  Church  really 
makes  religion  a  thing  of  this  world  only.  Undoubtedly,  much 
good  is  being  accomplished  by  social  workers  who  have  given  up 
belief  in  historic  Christianity;  but  it  is  good  that  does  not  go  to  the 
root  of  the  matter.  Suppose  we  have  improved  conditions  on  this 
earth,  suppose  more  men  have  healthy  employment  and  an  abun- 
dance of  worldly  goods.  Even  so  the  thought  of  death  cannot  be 
banished.  Is  the  totality  of  man's  happiness  limited  to  a  brief 
span  of  life;  are  we  after  all  but  creatures  of  a  day?  Or  is  there  an 
eternal  life  beyond  the  grave,  with  infinite  possibilities  of  good  or 
evil?  Jesus  and  his  apostles  and  the  whole  of  the  apostolic  Church 
adopted  the  latter  alternative. 

(3)  The  Secularization  of  Religion. — We  lay  our  finger  here  upon 
one  of  the  points  where  the  modern  Church  is  in  danger  of  departing 
most  fundamentally  from  the  apostolic  model.  Religion  is  in 
serious  danger  of  being  secularized;  that  is,  of  being  regarded  as 
concerned  merely  with  this  life.  The  only  corrective  is  the  recovery 
of  the  old  conception  of  God.  God  is  not  merely  another  name  for 
the  highest  aspirations  of  men,  he  is  not  merely  the  summation  of 
the  social  forces  which  are  working  for  human  betterment.  On  the 
contrary,  he  is  a  living  Person,  working  in  the  world,  but  also 
eternally  independent  of  it.  You  can  work  for  the  worldly  benefit 
of  your  fellow  men  without  coming  into  any  saving  contact  with 
God ;  it  does  make  a  vast  difference  what  you  believe ;  it  makes  all 
the  difference  between  death  and  life. 

(4)  The  Teaching  of  Jesus  and  of  the  Apostles. — Only  one-sided 
reading  of  the  New  Testament  can  find  support  for  the  opposite 
view.     Jesus  said,  "Inasmuch  as  ye  did  it  unto  one  of  these  my 


CHRISTIANITY  AND  HUMAN  RELATIONSHIPS      273 

brethren,  even  these  least,  ye  did  it  unto  me,"  Matt.  25  :  40;  but 
the  same  Jesus  also  said,  "If  any  man  cometh  unto  me,  and  hateth 
not  his  own  father,  and  mother,  and  wife,  and  children,  and  brethren, 
and  sisters,  yea,  and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple." 
Luke  14  :  26.  The  giving  of  a  cup  of  cold  water,  which  receives  the 
blessing  of  Jesus,  is  done  for  "one  of  these  little  ones  ...  in  the  name 
of  a  disciple."  Matt.  10  :  42.  Evidently  the  good  works  of  the 
Christian  are  not  independent  of  the  attitude  of  the  doer  toward 
Jesus  and  toward  God;  Jesus  regards  the  personal  relation  between 
himself  and  his  disciples  as  one  which  takes  precedence  of  even  the 
holiest  of  earthly  ties.  Far  more  convincing,  however,  than  any 
citation  of  definite  passages  is  the  whole  spirit  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment teaching;  evidently  both  Jesus  and  his  early  disciples  had  their 
lives  determined  by  the  thought  of  the  living,  personal  God,  holy 
and  mysterious  and  independent  of  the  world.  Social  service 
exists  for  the  sake  of  God,  not  God  for  the  sake  of  social  service. 
The  reversal  of  this  relationship  is  one  of  the  most  distressing 
tendencies  of  the  present  day ;  a  study  of  the  apostolic  Church  may 
bring  a  return  to  sanity  and  humility. 

3.     THE  ASCETIC  SOLUTION 

The  second  answer  to  our  question  is  the  answer  of  ascetics  of 
many  different  kinds.  According  to  this  answer,  the  relationship 
of  the  Christian  to  God  on  the  one  hand,  and  his  relationship  to  his 
fellow  men  on  the  other,  are  in  competition.  Consequently,  in 
order  to  strengthen  the  former,  the  latter  must  be  broken  off.  In 
its  extreme  form,  this  way  of  thinking  leads  to  the  hermit  ideal,  to 
the  belief  that  the  less  a  man  has  to  do  with  his  fellow  men  the  more 
he  has  to  do  with  God.  Such  conceptions  are  not  always  so  un- 
influential  as  we  are  inclined  to  think,  even  in  our  Protestant 
churches.  Monasticism  is  not  indeed  consistently  carried  out,  but 
it  is  often  present  in  spirit  and  in  principle.  Some  excellent 
Christians  seem  to  feel  that  whole-hearted,  natural  interest  in 
earthly  friends  is  disloyalty  to  Christ,  that  all  men  must  be  treated 
alike,  that  admission  of  one  man  into  the  depths  of  the  heart  more 
fully  than  another  is  contrary  to  the  universality  of  the  gospel. 
By  such  men,  individuals  are  not  treated  as  persons,  with  a  value  of 
their  own,  but  merely  as  opportunities  for  Christian  service. 

(1)  This  Solution  Defeats  Its  Own  End. — It  is  evident,  in  the 
first  place,  that  such  an  attitude  defeats  its  own  aim.  Evidently 
the  power  of  a  Christian  worker  depends  partly  at  least  upon  his 
Sen.  t.  in.  4. 


274  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

interest  in  individuals.  It  will  not  do,  for  example,  for  the  teachers 
in  this  course  to  let  their  students  say,  "The  teacher  loves  Christ 
supremely,  but  he  has  no  interest  in  me."  Evidently  the  power  of 
influencing  our  fellow  men  is  largely  increased  by  an  intimate 
personal  relationship;  if  we  are  to  serve  Christ  by  bringing  men  to 
his  feet,  then  we  ought  not  to  dissolve  but  rather  to  strengthen  the 
bonds  of  simple  affection  which  unite  us  to  our  human  friends. 

(2)  This  Solution  Is  Opposed  to  Apostolic  Example. — The 
example  of  the  apostolic  Church  points  in  the  same  direction;  we 
have  already  noticed  the  intensity  of  natural  affection  which  was 
displayed  even  by  a  man  so  thoroughly  and  heroically  devoted  to 
Christian  service  as  was  the  apostle  Paul.  This  example  might  well 
be  supplemented,  and  supplemented  most  emphatically  of  all  by 
the  example  which  lies  at  the  basis  of  all  of  the  apostolic  Church — 
the  example  of  Jesus  himself.  If  any  man  might  have  been  aloof 
from  his  fellow  men,  it  was  Jesus,  yet  as  a  matter  of  fact,  he  plainly 
had  his  earthly  friends. 

4.     THE  TRUE  SOLUTION 

The  true  solution  of  the  problem  is  found  in  consecration. 
Human  relationships  are  not  to  be  made  the  sole  aim  of  life; 
neither  are  they  to  be  destroyed;  but  they  are  to  be  consecrated 
to  the  service  of  God.  Love  for  God  under  normal  conditions 
comes  into  no  competition  with  love  for  man,  because  God  takes  a 
place  in  the  life  which  can  never  be  filled  by  any  human  friend; 
by  lopping  off  human  friendships  we  are  not  devoting  ourselves 
more  fully  to  God,  but  merely  becoming  less  efficient  servants 
of  him. 

5.     CHRISTIANITY  AND  SOCIAL  SERVICE 

Consecration  of  human  relationships  to  God  does  not  involve 
any  depreciation  of  what  is  known  to-day  as  "social  service." 
On  the  contrary  it  gives  to  social  service  its  necessary  basis  and 
motive  power.  Only  when  God  is  remembered  is  there  an  eternal 
outlook  in  the  betterment  of  human  lives;  the  improvement  of 
social  conditions,  which  gives  the  souls  of  men  a  fair  chance  instead 
of  keeping  them  stunted  and  balked  by  poverty  and  disease,  is 
seen  by  him  who  believes  in  a  future  life  and  a  final  judgment 
and  heaven  and  hell  to  have  value  not  only  for  time,  but  also  for 
eternity,  not  only  for  man,  but  also  for  the  infinite  God  . 

(1)  Society  or  the  Individual? — It  is  sometimes  regarded  as  a 
reproach   that   old-fashioned,  evangelical   Christianity   makes  its 


CHRISTIANITY  AND  HUMAN  RELATIONSHIPS     275 

first  appeal  to  the  individual.  The  success  of  certain  evan- 
gelists has  occasioned  considerable  surprise  in  some  quarters. 
Everyone  knows,  it  is  said,  that  the  "social  gospel"  is  the  really 
effective  modern  agency;  yet  some  evangelists  with  only  the  very 
crudest  possible  social  program  are  accomplishing  important  and 
beneficent  results!  The  lesson  may  well  be  learned,  and  it  should 
never  be  forgotten.  Despite  the  importance  of  social  reforms,  the 
first  purpose  of  true  Christian  evangelism  is  to  bring  the  individual 
man  clearly  and  consciously  into  the  presence  of  his  God.  Without 
that,  all  else  is  of  but  temporary  value;  the  human  race  is  composed 
of  individual  souls;  the  best  of  social  edifices  will  crumble  if  all  the 
materials  are  faulty. 

(2)  Every  Man  Should  First  Correct  His  Own  Faults. — The  true 
attitude  of  the  Christian  toward  social  institutions  can  be  learned 
clearly  from  the  example  of  the  apostolic  Church.  The  first  lesson 
that  the  early  Christians  learned  when  they  faced  the  ordinary  duties 
of  life  was  to  make  the  best  of  the  institutions  that  were  already 
existing.  There  was  nothing  directly  revolutionary  about  the 
apostolic  teaching.  Sharp  rebuke,  indeed,  was  directed  against  the 
covetousness  of  the  rich.  But  the  significant  fact  is  that  such  denun- 
ciations of  wealthy  men  were  addressed  to  the  wealthy  men  them- 
selves and  not  to  the  poor.  In  the  apostolic  Church,  every  man 
was  made  to  know  his  own  faults,  not  the  faults  of  other  people. 
The  rich  were  rebuked  for  their  covetousness  and  selfishness;  but 
the  poor  were  commanded,  with  just  as  much  vehemence,  to  labor 
for  their  own  support.  "If  any  will  not  work,"  said  Paul,  "neither 
let  him  eat."  II  Thess.  3  :  10.  In  short,  apostolic  Christianity 
sought  to  remove  the  evils  of  an  unequal  distribution  of  wealth,  not 
by  a  violent  uprising  of  the  poor  against  the  rich,  but  by  changing 
the  hearts  of  the  rich  men  themselves.  Modern  reform  movements 
are  often  very  different;  but  it  cannot  be  said  that  the  apostolic 
method  is  altogether  antiquated. 

(3)  The  Ennobling  of  Existing  Institutions. — Certainly  the 
apostolic  method  has  been  extraordinarily  successful;  it  has  ac- 
complished far  more  than  could  have  been  accomplished  by  a 
violent  reform  movement.  A  good  example  is  afforded  by  the 
institution  of  slavery.  Here,  if  anywhere,  we  might  seem  to  have 
an  institution  which  was  contrary  to  the  gospel.  Yet  Paul  sent 
back  a  runaway  slave  to  his  master,  and  evidently  without  the 
slightest  hesitation  or  compunction.  That  action  was  a  consistent 
carrying  out  of  the  principle  that  a  Christian  man,  instead  of  seeking 


276  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

an  immediate  change  in  his  social  position,  was  first  of  all  to  learn 
to  make  the  best  of  whatever  position  was  his  already.  "Let  each 
man  abide  in  that  calling  wherein  he  was  called.  Wast  thou  called 
being  a  bondservant?  care  not  for  it:  nay,  even  if  thou  canst  be- 
come free,  use  it  rather.  For  he  that  was  called  in  the  Lord  being 
a  bondservant,  is  the  Lord's  freedman:  likewise  he  that  was  called 
being  free,  is  Christ's  bondservant.  Ye  were  bought  with  a  price; 
become  not  bondservants  of  men.  Brethren,  let  each  man,  wherein 
he  was  called,  therein  abide  with  God."  I  Cor.  7  :  20-24.  The 
freedom  of  the  Christian,  in  other  words,  is  entirely  independent  of 
freedom  in  this  world;  a  slave  can  be  just  as  free  in  the  higher, 
spiritual  sense  as  his  earthly  master.  In  this  way  the  position  of 
the  slave  was  ennobled;  evidently  the  relation  of  Onesimus  to 
Philemon  was  expected  to  afford  both  slave  and  master  genuine 
opportunity  for  the  development  of  Christian  character  and  for 
the  performance  of  Christian  service. 

(4)  The  Substitution  of  Good  Institutions  for  Bad. — In  the  long 
run,  however,  such  conceptions  were  bound  to  exert  a  pervasive 
influence  even  upon  earthly  institutions.  If  Philemon  really 
adopted  the  Christian  attitude  toward  one  who  was  now  "more 
than  a  servant,  a  brother  beloved"  in  Christ,  then  in  the  course  of 
time  he  would  naturally  desire  to  make  even  the  outward  relation- 
ship conform  more  perfectly  to  the  inward  spiritual  fact.  The  final 
result  would  naturally  be  emancipation;  and  such  was  the  actual 
process  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  Slavery,  moreover,  is  only 
an  example;  a  host  of  other  imperfect  social  institutions  have 
similarly  been  modified  or  removed.  What  a  world  of  progress, 
for  example,  is  contained  in  Gal.  3  :  28:  "There  can  be  neither  Jew 
nor  Greek,  there  can  be  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  can  be  no  male 
and  female;  for  ye  are  all  one  man  in  Christ  Jesus."  Not  battles  and 
revolutions,  the  taking  of  cities  and  the  pulling  down  of  empires, 
are  the  really  great  events  of  history,  but  rather  the  enunciation  of 
great  principles  such  as  this.  "Ye  are  all  one  man  in  Christ 
Jesus" — these  words  with  others  like  them  have  moved  armies  like 
puppets,  and  will  finally  transform  the  face  of  the  world. 


In  the  Library. — R.  E.  Thompson,  "De  Civitate  Dei.  The  Divine 
Order  of  Human  Society."  Clow,  "Christ  in  the  Social  Order."  Cun- 
ningham, "Christianity  and  Social  Questions."  Schmidt,  "The  Social 
Results  of  Early  Christianity." 


LESSON  L 
THE  CHRISTIAN  USE  OF  THE  INTELLECT 


1.     THE  PROBLEM  OF  CHRISTIANITY  AND  CULTURE 

The  last  two  lessons  have  emphasized  the  duty  of  consecration. 
The  enjoyment  of  simple,  physical  blessings,  the  opportunities 
afforded  by  earthly  relationships,  are  all  to  be  devoted  to  the 
service  of  God.  Exactly  the  same  principle  must  be  applied  in  the 
lesson  for  to-day.  If  physical  health  and  strength  and  the  com- 
panionship of  human  friends  may  be  made  useful  in  the  Christian 
life,  surely  the  same  thing  is  true  of  intellectual  gifts.  The  most 
powerful  thing  that  a  man  possesses  is  the  power  of  his  mind. 
Brute  force  is  comparatively  useless;  the  really  great  achievements 
of  modern  times  have  been  accomplished  by  the  intellect.  If  the 
principle  of  consecration  is  true  at  all — if  it  be  true  that  God  desires, 
not  the  destruction  of  human  powers,  but  the  proper  use  of  them— 
then  surely  the  principle  must  be  applied  in  the  intellectual  sphere. 

The  field  should  not  be  limited  too  narrowly;  with  the  purely 
logical  and  acquisitive  faculties  of  the  mind  should  be  included  the 
imagination  and  the  sense  of  beauty.  In  a  word,  we  have  to  do  to- 
day with  the  relation  between  "culture"  and  Christianity.  For  the 
modern  Church  there  is  no  greater  problem.  A  mighty  civilization 
has  been  built  up  in  recent  years,  which  to  a  considerable  extent  is 
out  of  relation  to  the  gospel.  Great  intellectual  forces  which  are 
rampant  in  the  world  are  grievously  perplexing  the  Church.  The 
situation  calls  for  earnest  intellectual  effort  on  the  part  of  Christians. 
Modern  culture  must  either  be  refuted  as  evil,  or  else  be  made 
helpful  to  the  gospel.     So  great  a  power  cannot  safely  be  ignored. 

(1)  The  Obscurantist  Solution. — Some  men  in  the  Church  are 
inclined  to  choose  a  simple  way  out  of  the  difficulty ;  they  are  inclined 
to  reject  the  whole  of  modern  culture  as  either  evil  or  worthless; 
this  wisdom  of  the  world,  they  maintain,  must  be  deserted  for  the 
divine  "foolishness"  of  the  gospel.  Undoubtedly  such  a  view  con- 
tains an  element  of  truth,  but  in  its  entirety  it  is  impracticable. 
The  achievements  of  modern  culture  are  being  made  useful  for  the 
spread  of  the  gospel  by  the  very  advocates  of  the  view  now  in 

277 


278  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

question;  these  achievements,  therefore,  cannot  be  altogether  the 
work  of  Satan.  It  is  inconsistent  to  use  the  printing  press,  the 
railroad,  the  telegraph  in  the  propagation  of  our  gospel  and  at  the 
same  time  denounce  as  evil  those  activities  of  the  human  mind  by 
which  these  inventions  were  produced.  Indeed,  much  of  modern 
culture,  far  from  being  hostile  to  Christianity,  has  really  been 
produced  by  Christianity.  Such  Christian  elements  should  not 
be  destroyed;  the  wheat  should  not  be  rooted  up  with  the  tares. 

(2)  The  Worldly  Solution. — If,  however,  the  Christian  man  is  in 
danger  of  adopting  a  negative  attitude  toward  modern  culture,  of 
withdrawing  from  the  world  into  a  sort  of  unhealthy,  modernized, 
intellectual  monastery,  the  opposite  danger  is  even  more  serious. 
The  most  serious  danger  is  the  danger  of  being  so  much  engrossed  in 
the  wonderful  achievements  of  modern  science  that  the  gospel  is 
altogether  forgotten. 

(3)  The  True  Solution. — The  true  solution  is  consecration. 
Modern  culture  is  a  stumblingblock  when  it  is  regarded  as 
an  end  in  itself,  but  when  it  is  used  as  a  means  to  the  service  of  God 
it  becomes  a  blessing.  Undoubtedly  much  of  modern  thinking  is 
hostile  to  the  gospel.  Such  hostile  elements  should  be  refuted  and 
destroyed;  the  rest  should  be  made  subservient;  but  nothing  should 
be  neglected.  Modern  culture  is  a  mighty  force;  it  is  either 
helpful  to  the  gospel  or  else  it  is  a  deadly  enemy  of  the  gospel. 
For  making  it  helpful  neither  wholesale  denunciation  nor  whole- 
sale acceptance  is  in  place;  careful  discrimination  is  required, 
and  such  discrimination  requires  intellectual  effort.  There  lies  a 
supreme  duty  of  the  modern  Church.  Patient  study  should  not  be 
abandoned  to  the  men  of  the  world;  men  who  have  really  received 
the  blessed  experience  of  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  must  seek  to 
bring  that  experience  to  bear  upon  the  culture  of  the  modern  world, 
in  order  that  Christ  may  rule,  not  only  in  all  nations,  but  also  in 
every  department  of  human  life.  The  Church  must  seek  to  con- 
quer not  only  every  man,  but  also  the  whole  of  man.  Such  in- 
tellectual effort  is  really  necessary  even  to  the  external  advancement 
of  the  kingdom.  Men  cannot  be  convinced  of  the  truth  of  Chris- 
tianity so  long  as  the  whole  of  their  thinking  is  dominated  by  ideas 
which  make  acceptance  of  the  gospel  logically  impossible;  false 
ideas  are  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the  reception  of  the  gospel.  And 
false  ideas  cannot  be  destroyed  without  intellectual  effort. 

Such  effort  is  indeed  of  itself  insufficient.  No  man  was  ever 
argued  into  Christianity;  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the 


THE  CHRISTIAN  USE  OF  THE   INTELLECT         2^) 

really  decisive  thing.  But  the  Spirit  works  when  and  how  he  will, 
and  he  chooses  to  employ  the  intellectual  activities  of  Christian 
people  in  order  to  prepare  for  his  gracious  coming. 

2.     THE  APOSTOLIC  EXAMPLE 

Abundant  support  for  what  has  just  been  said  may  be  discovered 
in  the  history  of  the  apostolic  Church.  Paul's  speech  at  Athens,  for 
example,  shows  how  the  Christian  preacher  exhibited  the  connec- 
tion between  the  gospel  and  the  religious  aspirations  of  the  time. 
This  line  of  thought,  it  is  true,  was  merely  preliminary;  the  main 
thing  with  which  the  apostles  were  concerned  was  the  presentation 
and  explanation  of  the  gospel  itself.  Such  presentation  and  ex- 
planation, however,  certainly  required  intellectual  effort;  and  the 
effort  was  not  avoided.  The  epistles  of  Paul  are  full  of  profound 
thinking;  only  superficiality  can  ignore  the  apostolic  use  of  the 
intellect. 

(1)  Christianity  Based  Upon  Facts. — The  fundamental  reason 
why  this  intellectual  activity  was  so  prominent  in  the  apostolic  age 
is  that  the  apostles  thought  of  Christianity  as  based  upon  facts. 
Modern  Christians  sometimes  cherish  a  different  notion.  A  false 
antithesis  is  now  sometimes  set  up  between  belief  and  practice; 
Christianity,  it  is  said,  is  not  a  doctrine,  but  a  life.  In  reality, 
Christianity  is  not  only  a  doctrine,  but  neither  is  it  only  a  life;  it  is 
both.  It  is,  as  has  been  well  said,  a  life  because  it  is  a  doctrine. 
What  is  characteristic  of  Christianity  is  not  so  much  that  it  holds 
up  a  lofty  ethical  ideal  as  that  it  provides  the  power  by  which  the 
ideal  is  to  be  realized.  That  power  proceeds  from  the  great  facts 
upon  which  Christian  belief  is  founded,  especially  the  blessed  facts 
of  Christ's  atoning  death  and  triumphant  resurrection.  Where 
belief  in  these  facts  has  been  lost,  the  Christian  life  may  seem  to 
proceed  for  a  time  as  before,  but  it  proceeds  only  as  a  locomotive 
runs  after  the  steam  has  been  shut  off;  the  momentum  is  soon  lost. 
If,  however,  Christianity  is  based  upon  facts,  it  cannot  do  without 
the  use  of  the  mind ;  whatever  may  be  said  of  mere  emotions,  facts 
cannot  be  received  without  employment  of  the  reason.  Christian 
faith  is  indeed  more  than  intellectual;  it  involves  rejoicing  in  the 
heart  and  acceptance  by  the  will,  but  the  intellectual  element  in  it 
can  never  be  removed.  We  cannot  trust  in  Christ,  in  the  Christian 
sense,  unless  we  are  convinced  that  he  lived  a  holy  life  when  he  was 
on  earth,  that  he  claimed  justly  to  be  divine,  that  he  died  on  the 
cross,  and  that  he  rose  again  from  the  dead. 


280  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

(2)  Christianity  Involves  Theology.  —  Furthermore,  Christian 
faith  involves  not  only  a  bare  acceptance  of  these  facts,  it  involves 
also  some  explanation  of  them.  That  explanation  can  never  be 
complete;  the  gospel  contains  mysteries  in  the  presence  of  which 
only  wondering  reverence  is  in  place;  but  some  explanation  there 
must  be  It  is  quite  useless,  for  example,  to  know  merely  that  a 
holy  man,  Jesus,  died  on  the  cross;  it  is  even  useless  to  know  that 
the  Son  of  God  came  to  earth  and  died  in  that  way.  The  death 
of  Christ  has  meaning  for  us  only  because  it  was  a  death  for  our 
sins;  the  story  of  the  cross  becomes  a  gospel  only  when  the  blessed 
meaning  of  it  is  explained.  The  explanation  of  that  meaning  forms 
the  subject  of  a  large  part  of  the  New  Testament.  The  apostolic 
Church  had  none  of  our  modern  aversion  to  theology. 

It  is  time  for  us  to  return  to  the  apostolic  example.  Mere 
bustling  philanthropy  will  never  conquer  the  world.  The  real 
springs  of  the  Church's  power  lie  in  an  inward,  spiritual  realm;  they 
can  be  reached  only  by  genuine  meditation.  The  eighth  chapter  of 
Romans  has  been  neglected  long  enough;  neglect  of  it  is  bringing 
deadly  weakness.  Instead  of  adapting  her  message  to  the  changing 
fashions  of  the  time,  the  Church  should  seek  to  understand  the 
message  itself.  The  effort  will  not  be  easy;  in  a  "practical"  age, 
honest  thinking  is  hard.  But  the  results  will  be  plain.  Power  lies 
in  the  deep  things  of  God. 

(3)  The  Duty  of  Every  Man. — The  great  intellectual  duty  of  the 
modern  Church  is  not  confined  to  a  few  men  of  scholarly  tastes. 
On  the  contrary,  the  simplest  Christian  may  have  his  part;  what 
is  needed  first  of  all  is  common  sense.  By  an  unhealthy  senti- 
mentalism,  old-fashioned  study  has  been  discredited.  If  God  is 
speaking  in  the  Bible,  surely  the  logical  thing  for  us  to  do  is  to  hear. 
Yet  modern  Christians  are  strangely  neglectful  of  this  simple  duty. 
Bible  study  is  regarded  as  of  less  importance  than  social  service; 
improvement  of  earthly  conditions  is  preferred  to  acquaintance 
with  God's  Word.  The  evil  may  easily  be  corrected,  and  it  may  be 
corrected  first  of  all  by  the  old-fashioned  reading  of  the  Bible. 
That  requires  intellectual  effort — there  is  no  use  in  turning  the 
pages  if  the  mind  is  elsewhere — but  the  effort  can  be  made  by  the 
plain  man  as  well  as  by  the  scholar.  Simple  acquaintance  with  the 
Bible  facts  by  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Church  will  accomplish  as 
much  as  anything  else  toward  meeting  the  arguments  of  opponents. 
By  learning  what  Christianity  is,  we  shall  be  able,  almost  uncon- 
sciously, to  refute  what  can  be  said  against  it. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  USE  OF  THE  INTELLECT         281 

3.     THE  PRACTICE  OF  THE  TRUTH 

This  intellectual  effort,  however,  should  never  be  separated  from 
practice.  The  best  way  to  fix  truth  in  the  mind  is  to  practice  it  in 
life.  If  our  study  teaches  us  that  God  is  holy,  let  us  hate  sin  as 
God  hates  it.  If  we  learn  that  God  is  loving,  let  us  love  our  fellow 
men  as  God  loves  them.  If  the  Bible  tells  us  of  the  salvation  offered 
by  Christ,  let  us  accept  it  with  a  holy  joy,  and  live  in  the  power  of  it 
day  by  day.  That  is  the  true  "practical  Christianity",  a  Christian- 
ity that  is  based  solidly  upon  facts.  Conduct  goes  hand  in  hand 
with  doctrine;  love  is  the  sister  of  truth. 

4.     GOD  THE  SOURCE  OF  TRUTH 

The  ultimate  Source  of  all  truth,  as  of  all  love,  is  God.  The 
knowledge  for  which  we  are  pleading  can  never  result  in  pride,  for 
it  is  a  knowledge  that  God  gives,  and  a  knowledge  consecrated  at 
every  point  to  God's  service.  Presumptuous  reliance  upon  human 
wisdom  comes  from  knowledge  that  ignores  part  of  the  facts;  true 
science  leads  to  humility.  If  we  accept  all  other  facts,  but  ignore  the 
supreme  fact  of  God's  love  in  Jesus  Christ,  then  of  course  our 
knowledge  will  be  one-sided.  It  may  succeed  in  producing  creature 
comforts;  it  may  improve  the  external  conditions  of  life  upon  this 
earth;  it  may  afford  purely  intellectual  pleasure;  but  it  will  never 
reveal  the  really  important  things.  This  one-sided  knowledge 
is  what  Paul  was  speaking  of  in  I  Cor.  1:21  when  he  said  that  "the 
world  through  its  wisdom  knew  not  God."  The  true  wisdom  takes 
account  of  the  "foolishness"  of  God's  message,  and  finds  that  that 
foolishness  is  wiser  than  men.  The  true  wisdom  of  the  gospel  is 
revealed  only  through  the  Holy  Spirit;  only  the  Spirit  of  God  can 
reveal  the  things  of  God.  Without  the  Spirit,  the  human  mind 
becomes  hopeless  in  dismal  error;  it  is  the  Spirit  of  truth  who  sheds 
the  true  light  over  our  path. 

"O  grant  us  light,  that  we  may  know 

The  wisdom  Thou  alone  canst  give; 
That  truth  may  guide  where'er  we  go, 

And  virtue  bless  where'er  we  live." 


In  the  Library. — Patton,  "A  Summary  of  Christian  Doctrine." 
Greene,  "Christian  Doctrine."  A.  A.  Hodge,  "Outlines  of  Theology" 
and  "Popular  Lectures  on  Theological  Themes." 


LESSON  LI 
THE  CHRISTIAN  HOPE  AND  THE  PRESENT  POSSESSION 


A  type  of  religious  effort  has  become  prevalent  to-day  which  is 
directed  chiefly  to  the  present  life;  the  improvement  of  worldly 
conditions  is  often  regarded  as  the  chief  end  of  man.  All  such 
tendencies  are  strikingly  at  variance  with  apostolic  Christianity. 
The  apostolic  Church  was  intensely  other-worldly.  The  chief 
gift  that  the  apostles  offered  was  not  a  better  and  more  comfortable 
life  in  this  world,  but  an  entrance  into  heaven. 

1.     THE  END  OF  THE  WORLD 

Only  the  great  outlines  of  the  events  connected  with  the  end  of 
the  world  are  revealed  in  the  New  Testament.  Minute  details 
cannot  be  discovered  except  by  an  excessively  literal  method  of 
interpretation,  which  is  not  really  in  accord  with  the  meaning  of  the 
apostolic  writers.  Some  have  supposed,  for  example,  that  there 
are  to  be  two  resurrections,  first  a  resurrection  of  the  Christian 
dead  and  long  afterwards  a  resurrection  of  other  men;  expecta- 
tion of  a  thousand-year  reign  of  Christ  upon  earth  has  been 
widely  prevalent.  Such  beliefs  are  not  to  be  lightly  rejected,  since 
they  are  based  upon  an  interpretation  of  certain  New  Testament 
passages  which  is  not  altogether  devoid  of  plausibility;  but  on  the 
whole  they  are  at  least  doubtful  in  view  of  other  passages,  and 
especially  in  view  of  the  true  nature  of  prophecy.  God  has  re- 
vealed, not  details  to  satisfy  our  curiosity,  but  certain  basal  facts 
which  should  determine  our  lives. 

Those  basal  facts,  connected  with  the  end  of  the  world,  are  a 
second  coming  of  Christ,  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  a  final  judg- 
ment, an  eternity  of  punishment  for  the  wicked  and  of  blessing 
for  those  who  have  trusted  in  Christ.  It  is  not  maintained  that 
these  facts  stand  absolutely  alone;  certainly  they  are  fully  ex- 
plained, at  least  in  their  spiritual  significance;  but  the  devout 
Bible-reader  should  be  cautious  about  his  interpretation  of  details. 

2.     FEAR  AND  JOY 

The  practical  effect  of  the  apostolic  teaching  about  the  end  of  the 
world  should  be  a  combination  of  earnestness  with  joy.     A  man 

282 


CHRISTIAN  HOPE  AND  PRESENT  POSSESSION     283 

who  lives  under  the  expectation  of  meeting  Christ  as  Judge  will 
desert  the  worldly  standard  of  values  for  a  higher  standard.  He 
will  rate  happiness  and  worldly  splendor  lower,  in  order  to  place  the 
supreme  emphasis  upon  goodness.  The  difference  between  evil 
and  good,  between  sin  and  holiness,  is  not  a  trifle,  not  a  thing  of 
merely  relative  importance,  as  many  men  regard  it;  it  enters  deep 
into  the  constitution  of  the  universe,  it  is  the  question  of  really 
eternal  moment.  Again  and  again,  in  the  New  Testament,  the 
thought  of  Christ's  coming  and  of  the  judgment  which  he  will 
hold  is  made  the  supreme  motive  to  a  pure  and  holy  life.  The 
apostolic  example  may  well  be  borne  in  mind.  When  we  are 
tempted  to  commit  a  mean  or  dishonest  or  unclean  act,  when 
unholy  thoughts  crowd  in  upon  us  like  a  noisome  flood,  we  cannot 
do  better  than  think  of  the  day  when  we  shall  stand  in  the  presence 
of  the  pure  and  holy  Judge. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  thought  of  Christ's  coming  is  to  the 
believer  the  source  of  inexpressible  joy.  Christ  has  saved  us  from 
a  terrible  abyss.  Our  joy  in  salvation  is  in  proportion  to  our  dread 
of  the  destruction  from  which  we  have  been  saved.  To  the  truly 
penitent  man,  the  thought  of  the  righteous  God  is  full  of  terror. 
God  is  holy;  we  would  sometimes  endeavor  vainly  to  shrink  from 
his  presence.  Yet  such  a  God  has  stretched  out  his  hand  to  save 
— there  is  the  wonder  of  the  gospel — and  if  we  trust  in  the  Saviour 
the  last  great  day  need  cause  no  fear.  We  are  lost  in  sin,  but  God 
looks  not  upon  us  but  upon  him  who  died  to  save  us.  "Salvation" 
to  the  apostolic  Church  meant  "rescue,"  rescue  from  the  just  and 
awful  judgment  of  God. 

3.     THE  INTERMEDIATE  STATE 

The  time  of  that  judgment  has  not  been  revealed,  but  so  far  as 
any  offer  of  repentance  is  concerned  the  time  comes  to  every  man  at 
death.  One  question  of  detail  cannot  altogether  be  ignored.  What 
did  the  apostles  teach  about  the  condition  of  the  believer  between 
death  and  the  final  resurrection?  Upon  this  subject,  the  New 
Testament  says  very  little,  but  it  becomes  clear  at  least  that  the 
believer,  even  when  absent  from  the  body,  is  to  be  present  with  the 
Lord,  II  Cor.  5  :  8,  and  that  to  die  is  to  be  with  Christ.  Phil.  1  :  23. 
On  the  whole,  no  better  statement  of  the  apostolic  teaching  about 
the  "intermediate  state"  can  be  formulated  than  that  which  is  con- 
tained in  the  Shorter  Catechism:  "The  souls  of  believers  are  at 
their  death  made  perfect  in  holiness,  and  do  immediately  pass  into 


284  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

glory ;  and  their  bodies,  being  still  united  to  Christ,  do  rest  in  their 
graves,  till  the  resurrection."  The  hope  of  an  immediate  entrance 
into  bliss  at  the  time  of  death  should  not  be  allowed,  however,  to 
obscure  the  importance  of  the  resurrection.  The  resurrection  of 
the  body  will  be  necessary  to  "the  full  enjoying  of  God  to  all 
eternity." 

4.     THE  FINAL  BLESSEDNESS 

That  enjoying  of  God  is  no  mere  selfish  pleasure;  it  means 
first  of  all  a  triumph  of  holiness.  Every  last  vestige  of  evil  will  be 
removed.  No  taint  of  sin  will  separate  the  redeemed  creature  from 
his  God.  Service  will  be  free  and  joyous.  The  consummation, 
moreover,  will  concern  not  merely  individuals,  but  the  race;  no  mere 
expectation  of  the  personal  immortality  of  individuals  begins  to  do 
justice  to  the  apostolic  teaching.  The  ultimate  end,  indeed,  is  not 
our  own  enjoyment,  but  the  glory  of  God.  Some  carnal,  materialistic 
conceptions  of  the  future  age  would  really  remove  God  from  his 
own  heaven,  but  such  is  not  the  teaching  of  the  New  Testament. 
God  will  be  all  and  in  all ;  only  in  his  glory  is  to  be  found  the  true 
glory  of  a  redeemed  race.  The  power  of  loving  God  is  the  highest 
joy  that  heaven  contains. 

5.     THE  DISPENSATION  OF  THE  SPIRIT 

The  present  age,  according  to  the  New  Testament,  is  a  time  of 
waiting  and  striving;  it  is  related  to  the  future  glory  as  a  battle  is 
related  to  the  subsequent  victory.  Satisfaction  with  the  present 
life,  even  as  it  is  led  by  the  best  of  Christians,  would  to  the  apostles 
have  been  abhorrent;  the  Christian  is  still  far  from  perfect.  A 
prime  condition  of  progress  is  a  divine  discontent.  Jesus  pronounced 
a  blessing  upon  them  that  "hunger  and  thirst  after  righteousness." 
Eternal  things  to  us  are  unseen;  they  can  be  discovered  only  by 
the  eye  of  faith;  we  long  for  a  time  when  hope  will  be  supplanted 
by  sight.  Nevertheless,  there  is  no  room  for  despondency;  the 
blessed  time  is  surely  coming. 

Its  coming  is  rendered  certain  by  the  presence,  here  and  now, 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Spirit  may  be  relied  upon  to  prepare  us, 
both  in  soul  and  in  body,  for  the  glory  of  heaven. 

(1)  The  Spirit  in  the  Old  Testament  and  in  the  Life  of  Jesus. — 
The  Spirit  of  God  was  mentioned  even  in  the  Old  Testament.  At 
the  beginning  he  "moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters,"  Gen.  1:2; 
he  was  the  source  of  the  mighty  deeds  of  heroes  and  of  the  prophets' 
inspired  words.     In  the  life  and  teaching  of  Jesus,  however,  the 


CHRISTIAN  HOPE  AND  PRESENT  POSSESSION      285 

Spirit  was  far  more  fully  revealed  than  he  had  ever  been  revealed 
before.  He  was  the  source  of  Jesus'  human  nature,  Matt.  1  :  18,  20; 
Luke  1  :  35;  he  descended  upon  the  newly  proclaimed  Messiah,  Matt. 
3  :  16,  and  was  operative  in  all  the  earthly  ministry  of  the  Lord. 

(2)  The  Spirit  in  the  Church. — For  the  disciples,  however,  the 
full  glory  of  the  Spirit's  presence  was  manifested  only  after  Jesus 
himself  had  been  taken  up  into  heaven;  the  present  age,  from 
Pentecost  to  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord,  is  peculiarly  the 
dispensation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Discontent  with  the  Church's 
imperfections  and  dismay  at  her  many  adversaries  should  never 
cause  us  to  lose  confidence  in  the  work  that  is  being  done  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  It  was  expedient  that  Jesus  should  go  away; 
through  the  other  "Comforter"  whom  he  has  sent,  he  manifests 
himself  even  more  gloriously  than  he  did  to  the  disciples  in  Galilee. 

(3)  The  Nature  of  the  Spirit. — The  apostles  never  discuss  the 
nature  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  any  thoroughly  systematic  way.  But 
two  great  facts  are  really  presupposed  in  the  whole  New  Testament. 
In  the  first  place,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  God,  and  in  the  second  place 
he  is  a  person  distinct  from  the  Father  and  from  the  Son.  The 
divinity  of  the  Spirit  appears,  for  example,  in  I  Cor.  2:11.  The 
point  of  that  verse  is  that  the  Spirit  is  as  closely  related  to  God  as 
the  human  spirit  is  to  a  man.  "For  who  among  men  knoweth  the 
things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  the  man,  which  is  in  him?  even 
so  the  things  of  God  none  knoweth,  save  the  Spirit  of  God."  The 
distinct  personality  of  the  Spirit  appears  with  special  clearness  in 
Rom.  8  :  26,  27.  There  the  Spirit  is  represented  as  making  inter- 
cession with  him  "that  searcheth  the  hearts";  the  one  who  inter- 
cedes is  personally  distinct  from  him  before  whom  he  makes  inter- 
cession. Even  more  convincing,  perhaps,  is  the  great  promise  of 
Christ  in  John  14  :  16,  17,  26;  15  :  26;  16  :  7-15,  where  the  other 
"Comforter"  is  spoken  of  in  clearly  personal  terms  and  is  dis- 
tinguished both  from  the  Father  and  from  the  Son.  Personal  dis- 
tinctness, however,  is  not  inconsistent  with  a  perfect  unity  of 
nature.  What  the  Spirit  does  the  Son  and  the  Father  do;  when  the 
other  Comforter  comes  to  the  Church,  Christ  himself  comes.  The 
doctrine  of  the  "Trinity"  is  a  profound  mystery,  but  its  mysterious- 
ness  is  no  obstacle  to  the  acceptance  of  its  truth.  Mystery  in  the 
depths  of  God's  nature  is  surely  to  be  expected.  This  mystery, 
taught  by  the  pen  of  inspired  writers,  has  brought  salvation  and 
peace  into  the  lives  of  men.  Distinctly  Trinitarian  passages,  such 
as  Matt.  28  :  19;  II  Cor.  13  :  14,  are  merely  the  summation  of  the 


286  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

New  Testament  teaching  about  God,  and  that  teaching  has  worked 
itself  out  in  unspeakable  blessing  in  the  life  of  the  Church. 

(4)  The  Work  of  the  Spirit. — A  complete  summary  of  the  belief 
of  the  apostolic  Church  about  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  would 
be  impossible  in  one  brief  lesson.  The  Christian  life  is  begun 
by  the  Spirit,  and  continued  by  his  beneficent  power.  Conversion, 
according  to  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  is  only  the  manward  aspect  of 
a  profound  change  in  the  depths  of  the  soul.  That  change  is 
"regeneration,"  a  new  birth.  Christian  experience  is  no  mere  im- 
provement of  existing  conditions,  but  the  entrance  of  something 
entirely  new.  Man  is  not  merely  sick  in  trespasses  and  sins,  but 
"dead";  only  a  new  birth  will  bring  life.  That  new  birth  is  a 
mysterious,  creative  act  of  the  Spirit  of  God.     John  3  :  3-8. 

But  the  Spirit  does  not  leave  those  whom  he  has  regenerated  to 
walk  alone;  he  dwells  in  them  and  enables  them  to  overcome  sin. 
The  motive  of  his  work  is  love.  He  is  no  blind  force,  but  a  loving 
Person;  the  Christian  can  enjoy  a  real  communion  with  him  as  with 
the  Father  and  the  Son.  In  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  we  have 
communion  with  God ;  the  Persons  of  the  Godhead  are  united  in  a 
manner  far  beyond  all  human  analogies.  There  is  no  imperfect 
medium  separating  us  from  the  divine  presence;  by  the  gracious 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  we  come  into  vital  contact  with  the  living 
God. 

The  Spirit  is  the  ground  and  cause  of  Christian  freedom.  "Where 
the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  liberty."  II  Cor.  3  :  17.  "For 
as  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  these  are  sons  of  God.  For 
ye  received  not  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  unto  fear;  but  ye  re- 
ceived the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba,  Father." 
Rom.  8  :  14,  15.  This  liberty  that  the  Spirit  brings  is,  however, 
not  a  liberty  to  sin;  it  is  liberation  from  sin.  The  body  of  the 
Christian  is  a  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  in  that  temple  only  purity 
is  in  place.  The  inward  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  heart  is 
more  powerful  than  the  law;  if  a  man  yields  to  that  power  he 
will  overcome  the  flesh;  the  law  of  God  is  fulfilled  by  those  "who 
walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit." 


In  the  Library. — Vos,  "The  Teaching  of  Jesus  Concerning  the 
Kingdom  of  God  and  the  Church."  Crane,  "The  Teaching  of  Jesus 
Concerning  the  Holy  Spirit."  Swete,  "The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  New 
Testament."     Thomas,  "The  Holy  Spirit  of  God." 


LESSON  LII 
RETROSPECT:  THE  FIRST  CHRISTIAN  CENTURY 


The  apostolic  example  can  be  applied  intelligently  to  the  problems 
of  our  time  only  if  there  be  some  understanding  of  the  intervening 
centuries.  We  are  connected  with  the  apostolic  Church  by  an 
unbroken  succession.  A  study  of  Church  history  would  help  us  to 
apply  the  New  Testament  teaching  to  our  own  age. 

The  Christian  writings  which  have  been  preserved  from  the 
early  part  of  the  second  century  show  a  marked  decline  from  the 
spiritual  level  of  the  apostles.  Evidently  the  special  inspiration 
which  had  made  the  New  Testament  a  guide  for  all  ages  had  been 
withdrawn.  Yet  the  Spirit  of  God  continued  to  lead  the  Church. 
Even  in  the  darkest  periods  of  Church  history  God  did  not  forget 
his  people. 

Only  scanty  Christian  writings  have  been  preserved  from  the 
first  three-quarters  of  the  second  century;  the  extant  works  of  the 
so-called  "Apostolic  Fathers"  and  of  the  "Apologists"  are  of  limited 
extent.  About  the  close  of  the  century,  however,  the  record  be- 
comes more  complete.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Irenaeus  of  Asia 
Minor  and  Gaul,  and  Tertullian  of  North  Africa,  give  a  varied 
picture  of  the  Christian  life  of  the  time.  The  Church  had  gained 
rapidly  in  influence  since  the  conclusion  of  the  apostolic  age;  per- 
secutions had  not  succeeded  in  checking  her  advance.  Finally, 
under  Constantine,  in  the  first  part  of  the  fourth  century, 
Christianity  became  the  favored  religion  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

About  the  same  time,  in  A.  D.  325,  the  first  ecumenical  council, 
at  Nicaea,  undertook  the  work  of  formulating  the  belief  of  the 
Church.  The  creeds  which  were  adopted  at  the  great  ancient 
councils  are  accepted  to-day  in  all  parts  of  Christendom.  During 
the  same  general  period,  the  poweY  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  was 
gradually  increased  until  it  culminated  in  the  papacy. 

After  the  conquest  of  the  western  part  of  the  Roman  Empire  in 
the  fifth  century,  Christianity  was  accepted  by  the  barbarian  con- 
querors, and  during  the  dark  ages  that  followed  the  Church 
preserved  the  light  of  learning  and  piety  until  a  better  day  should 
dawn.     During  the  middle  ages,  though  there  was  for  the  most 

287 


288  SENIOR  GRADED  LESSONS 

part  little  originality  in  Christian  thinking,  great  scholars  and 
theologians  formed  striking  exceptions  to  the  general  condition. 
The  political  power  of  the  papacy  became  enormous,  but  was 
hindered  by  the  personal  weakness  and  immorality  of  many  of 
the  popes.  The  degraded  moral  and  spiritual  condition  of  the 
Church  was  counteracted  here  and  there  by  the  establishment  of 
monastic  orders,  whose  purpose  at  the  beginning  was  good,  by  the 
writings  of  certain  mystics,  and  by  the  work  of  the  three  "pre- 
reformers,"  Wyclif  in  England,  Huss  in  Bohemia  and  Savonarola 
in  Italy. 

A  genuine  advance,  however,  did  not  come  until  the  Reformation 
of  the  fifteenth  century,  when  Luther  in  Germany  and  Zwingli  in 
Switzerland,  almost  at  the  same  time  and  at  first  independently, 
became  the  leaders  in  a  mighty  protest.  A  little  later  Calvin 
carried  out  the  principles  of  the  Reformation  in  a  comprehensive 
theological  system,  and  by  the  power  of  his  intellect  and  the 
fervency  of  his  piety  exerted  an  enormous  influence  throughout  the 
world.  The  Reformation  was  distinctly  a  religious  movement, 
though  it  had  been  prepared  for  by  that  revival  of  learning  which 
is  called  the  Renaissance.  The  work  of  Luther  was  a  rediscovery 
of  Paul.  Not  the  performance  of  a  set  of  external  acts  prescribed 
by  the  Church,  but,  as  Paul  taught,  the  grace  of  God  received  by 
faith  alone,  is,  according  to  Luther,  the  means  of  salvation. 

The  Reformation  brought  about  a  counter-reformation  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  the  western  European  world  was 
finally  divided  between  the  two  great  branches  of  Christendom. 
After  a  period  of  controversy  and  wars  between  Protestants  and 
Catholics,  the  Church  was  called  upon  to  fight  a  great  battle 
against  unbelief.  That  battle,  begun  in  its  modern  form  about  the 
middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  continues  unabated  until  the 
present  day.  We  are  living  in  a  time  of  intellectual  changes.  To 
maintain  the  truth  of  the  gospel  at  such  a  time  and  to  present  it 
faithfully  and  intelligently  to  the  modern  world  is  the  supreme  task  of 
the  Church.  The  task  to  some  extent  has  been  accomplished ;  and 
the  missionary  movement  of  the  nineteenth  and  twentieth  centuries 
attests  the  vitality  of  the  ancient  faith.  God  has  not  deserted 
his  Church.  There  are  enemies  without  and  within,  compromise 
will  surely  bring  disaster;  but  the  gospel  of  Christ  has  not  lost  its 
power.  This  is  not  the  first  time  of  discouragement  in  the  history 
of  the  Church.  The  darkest  hour  has  always  been  followed  by 
the  dawn.  Who  can  tell  what  God  has  now  in  store? 
Sen.  t.  ra.  4. 


I'mi'ni   Theol°9'cal  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01 


112  8354 


DATE  DUE 

y/:,A 

-*    ^ 

/               f  /     * 

jAM^^ 

-'■  '     

TfTrm»i 

• 

HIGHSMITH  #< 

15230 

Printed 
In  USA 

